Larger v8 supercharger
#2
#3
The following users liked this post:
SinF (06-16-2020)
#5
Join Date: Feb 2014
Location: Adelaide, South Australia
Posts: 8,427
Received 3,207 Likes
on
2,364 Posts
The following users liked this post:
George05 (11-10-2019)
#7
Join Date: Feb 2014
Location: Adelaide, South Australia
Posts: 8,427
Received 3,207 Likes
on
2,364 Posts
![Default](/forum/images/icons/icon1.gif)
There is some discussion on this forum about the duty cycle and the head room of the stock fuel injectors on the AJ133SC, ie can they / will they flow enough already for a big power increase to say 750 hp, and I don't remember seeing a definitive answer to this question. But I do remember reading somewhere that the AJ133SC was designed from the get go for a max output of 700 hp, with the Eaton TVS R1900.
The following 2 users liked this post by OzXFR:
boostedxf (05-09-2022),
BruceTheQuail (11-09-2019)
Trending Topics
#8
![Default](/forum/images/icons/icon1.gif)
Indeed I believe Eaton (manufacturer) doesn't even sell their TVS supercharger to end users.
They appear to be available via a small number of distributors
Magnuson
Roush
Edelbrock
Harrop
TVS distributors
The complete unit is integral with an air to water intercooler that must obviously mate to the Jaguar AJ133 V8 inlet manifold (and fit under the bonnet - hood)
They are available as bolt on upgrade kits for Ford GT500 for example.
I think a custom solution would cost serious money as bolt on for Ford are in excess of $5000 if memory is correct.
That said if anyone was determined enough and had deep pockets (lots of spare cash) then the one to go for would be the larger TVS R 2650.
Although some may say that it's a larger displacement than needed (designed for engines up to 6.2L) crucially it's a more efficient design than either the TVS R 1900 fitted as standard or the next size up TVS R 2300.
It provides more airflow (obviously) but importantly takes less power to drive it.
All other things being optimised more airflow equals more power produced and less power to drive the blower means more of the increased power gets to the wheels.
Obviously big money needed to upgrade ZF8HP gearbox as the standard V8 maximum torque output is already extremely close to 700Nm limit of our transmission, though upgrade should be simple as there's a 900Nm variant available from ZF.
Probably fairly wise to spend money upgrading engine, brakes etc.
Great to imagine the beast it could be turned into with sufficient time, money and dedication.
Probably reasonable estimate would be 800bhp without difficulty, but eye watering cost!
Certainly on my fantasy upgrade list
TVS R2650
TVS R2650 detailed specifications
Last edited by Paul_59; 11-10-2019 at 04:59 AM.
#9
![Default](/forum/images/icons/icon1.gif)
The ZF8 has been used on vehicles pumping out well in excess of the advertised torque limit. I wouldn’t hesitate to use it on a 700-800hp application. Stuffing a larger SC on top of an engine merely requires access to a big hunk of aluminum and a milling machine to construct the mating IC. The same Heat exchangers could be used as the oversized SC should be operating at cooler temps. This is a process I am contemplating for my V6. However, with the manual transmission, I will definitely need to upgrade it (ZF S6-53).
#10
![Default](/forum/images/icons/icon1.gif)
The ZF8 has been used on vehicles pumping out well in excess of the advertised torque limit. I wouldn’t hesitate to use it on a 700-800hp application. Stuffing a larger SC on top of an engine merely requires access to a big hunk of aluminum and a milling machine to construct the mating IC. The same Heat exchangers could be used as the oversized SC should be operating at cooler temps. This is a process I am contemplating for my V6. However, with the manual transmission, I will definitely need to upgrade it (ZF S6-53).
Last edited by RacerX; 11-10-2019 at 06:32 AM.
The following users liked this post:
Paul_59 (11-10-2019)
#11
![Default](/forum/images/icons/icon1.gif)
2300 isn't a big enough step to make that much difference with heat. We're evaluating some options pretty seriously right now. Chris is doing Science!
__________________
Stuart Dickinson
Managing Director
VelocityAP Industries Ltd.
O: (1)250-485-5126
E: Stuart@VelocityAP.com
www.velocityap.com
![](https://www.jaguarforums.com/forum/signaturepics/sigpic147732_1.gif)
Stuart Dickinson
Managing Director
VelocityAP Industries Ltd.
O: (1)250-485-5126
E: Stuart@VelocityAP.com
www.velocityap.com
![](https://www.jaguarforums.com/forum/signaturepics/sigpic147732_1.gif)
#12
![Default](/forum/images/icons/icon1.gif)
Having read extensively about TVS R 2300 and 2650
Like I said any serious supercharger upgrade would use 2650, it displaces approximately 40% more volume per rotation than R1900.
It's different rotor geometry contributes to greater efficiency, lower outlet temperature (pre intercooler). More airflow volume obviously more power potential, lower outlet temperatures means increased mass for any volume as higher density, bigger intercooler also helps. Lower parasitic drag and lower power to drive than 2300 is an extra performance bonus.
Running standard supercharger faster via different pulleys will as many have found give some useful power increases however these gains are a little like power upgrade from turbo cars, they only get you so far with the standard OEM sized blower (whether supercharger or turbo charger) before the engine is running in a part of the compressor map that is less efficient.
This situation gives some increased airflow (good for power increase) at the expense of higher air temperature , lower density air (leads to power decrease) plus Spinning supercharger faster uses more power to drive the blower and the power to drive any supercharger will increase in proportion to speed of rotation (actually proportional to square of rotation speed if memory serves) which reduces power available from engine / ,blower combination.
Regarding earlier question about fuel injectors flow capacity, does anyone know the specification of OEM standard.
Port injection can gave some increased fuel flow from standard injectors by running higher fuel pressures , only if significantly greater fuel flow does injectors replacement become desirable.
With direct injection increased injection pressure option may be less straightforward.
I suppose an expensive and complicated solution might be to combine standard direct injection with additional port injection, additional benefit of reducing inlet valve / port carbon build up.
Last edited by Paul_59; 11-19-2019 at 03:38 PM.
#13
![Default](/forum/images/icons/icon1.gif)
The 2650 is the one!
__________________
Stuart Dickinson
Managing Director
VelocityAP Industries Ltd.
O: (1)250-485-5126
E: Stuart@VelocityAP.com
www.velocityap.com
![](https://www.jaguarforums.com/forum/signaturepics/sigpic147732_1.gif)
Stuart Dickinson
Managing Director
VelocityAP Industries Ltd.
O: (1)250-485-5126
E: Stuart@VelocityAP.com
www.velocityap.com
![](https://www.jaguarforums.com/forum/signaturepics/sigpic147732_1.gif)
#15
The following users liked this post:
draguarxkrsgt (09-23-2022)
#17
The following users liked this post:
Stuart Satter (06-16-2020)
#18
The following 3 users liked this post by supersportmtl: