it would be a blow thru
Printable View
it would be a blow thru
Yeah,I saw no difference in the old designs than a modern turbo,supercharger type setup.Other than the fact you could shut it off.But how well it actually worked ???? they aint around no more!:LOL: !!anything that works usually sticks around in some form. Heck ford is changing the cam timing with oil pressure ,I am sure some electronics and solenoids would make it work.Although the old motors were about 50 ,60 hp and the forced air uped that to 100 to 120 hp.50 percent increase on an very inefficient design.14,760 cc 4 cyl motor may of had sumthing to do with it too!!:LOL:
:) Not quite so neccesary ! As has been pointed out, the blower rotors will spin quite freely with the vacume from the running engine. I have actually run engines with a blower insyalled and the belt removed, taken them for a drive, very streetable can get 60 to 70 mph out of them and that is just with moderate accellerator even though a little shy on power. The blower just windmills on the engine vacume. I also point out that the 671 had stock clearaces. And the engine ran at below normal operating temperature on the water guage. **)Quote:
Originally Posted by erik erikson
Engine vacuum spins the rotors?Quote:
Originally Posted by southerner
Very streetable?The blower windmills?A little shy on power?What brand of supercharger was it?I have used Dyers,BDS,Weiand,Kuhl and none of them spin as loose as you say un-less they are worn out.I would guess you have never been around a "roots style "blower.
Denny found it.Quote:
Originally Posted by DennyW
It was used on a car 15-20 years ago.
The mr2 is no longer made.
The engine made 145 hp at full boost.
Now if we could only make this work on a 6-71 hmmm.**)
I was working on the car and got the tack rail bolted on and one side mount for the top bow adapted to the Bebops body which came without them while you folks were working on this. DennyW has indeed found an example of a commercially engineered on/off huffer, but the air flow valve is an added technical detail that might not be easy to fabricate. Let's go back and ask Southerner to give more details on his experience running with a disengaged blower. He did say 6-71 so that would seem to be a Roots type and the example Henry Rifle gave is encouraging for the relative ease of rotation of the rotors when not driven. So the question really is where to get the clutch and I guess one would look at whatever is the largest AC compressor unit. I burnt out two small AC clutches on a Voyager wagon which had a relatively small unit, so they are not overly sturdy even for their intended use. Maybe a starter solenoid/Bendix could be modified to pull in a clutch but a stronger clutch would require more current if it is an electrical type. Then there is the cart centrifugal type which might be adjusted to engage at a set rpm range like a torque converter, say at 2500 to 3000 rpm. That way you could cruise in high gear on the highway without the blower for better mpg but still have the blower engaged when accelerating in the lower gears. I have plenty left to do on my car just to get it running and maybe someone here will build an on/off huffer while I am doing other things and thinking about this. Who wants to build one? Actually I kind of like the idea of the centrifugal clutch that turns on the blower at 2500 rpm, I'll think about that.
Southerner can you give any more details?
Don Shillady
Retired Scientist/teen rodder
:eek: Ah have been around heaps of roots style blowers, being a diesil mechanic for many years I have had plenty of opertunity to convert jimmy 471's and 671's to chevy use. If given an option I will choose a blower every time over other hop up tricks. I was refering to a 671 blower that did not have any teflon in the rotors or end plates. It's only a street blower so it does not need to produce massive amounts of boost. So therefore the clearances are loose. To be honest I still use the diesil specifications when setting them up. Just that I turn either the gears or the rotor support shoulders rather than using the thin shims to get the c and cc clearances. ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by erik erikson
Ok Ill let the cat outa the bag,1938 mercedes 540 k has all the parts you need for clutch operated roots type blower!!!I will take a pic and post it shortly!!!:LOL:
I think we might be "beating a dead horse" on this one.Quote:
Originally Posted by shawnlee28
Here it is!!!
Hey fellas I need some heads with 190cc intake runners and 64cc chambers should I invest my money in my stock heads or, Because I want this to be a Edelbrock Performer RPM motor I could get a set of those heads but they dont make a performer rpm head as I want it. What should I do
WHy 190 cc if you want an Edelbrock Performer RPM motor? Edelbrock has some pretty smart engineers, and they design their packages to work together.
well I went to a site to see some dynoed 383s and found a 503 h/p mtr and they said they used those heads and yeah I know Edelbrock designes their parts to work togeather would it even matter that the mtr didnt get that much air? So they make their parts work togeather does that mean you cant trick them out asn in port and polish, shave, and so on?
What it means is that an engine is a system. The parts need to work together. If you take heads that are designed for a certain displacement, camshaft, etc., and start "tricking them out," you're likely to mess up the system.
Question. Have you ever built a motor?
ok. and yes I have couple down and a 305, 350 and a 360 to go
and convert my other 350 to 383
if ur gonna use an edelbrock anything use an RPM air gap and a set of their heads. the air gap gave my car twice the bottom end pull it had with a strip dominator but it aint got twice the top end like the strip" did. i guess thats part of racing do you want more bottom or top end? cant have em both for cheap usually. ill get of my soapbox just thought id ramble for a bit :D ............scooter
um I think more bottom to mid