TVS Upgrade
#1
#3
![Default](/forum/images/icons/icon1.gif)
this is the link of the company EATON who produces the Jaguar superchargers
http://www.eaton.com/EatonCom/Produc...gers/index.htm
I supposed it was the 90 but it could be the 112 too
But it doesn't matter which we have but if it could be possible to upgrade it with the new model
http://www.eaton.com/EatonCom/Produc...gers/index.htm
I supposed it was the 90 but it could be the 112 too
But it doesn't matter which we have but if it could be possible to upgrade it with the new model
#5
#6
![Default](/forum/images/icons/icon1.gif)
The TVS seems to be a huge step forward in the roots design, and definitely worth to consider. It seems (I say seems as I do not have experience with it other than see comparison dyno’s) , that the max efficiency level is around the 14.5 psi which is a big step forward, and also the amount of drag/power it requires from the engine is lower compared to the M112. Also it is also designed to turn 18.000 rpm compared to the 14.000 rpm of the M112.
You would have to make a custom setup just like I did for the twin-screw compressors, and maybe you could get the 1.9 ltr version to fit (not sure what TVS casings are possible to buy). However the twin-screw compressor is still better imho (and from others if you read the reviews), especially at higher boost levels. Not sure what the price difference between the SC and TVS would be, I have not seen any prices for the TVS.
Good luck
You would have to make a custom setup just like I did for the twin-screw compressors, and maybe you could get the 1.9 ltr version to fit (not sure what TVS casings are possible to buy). However the twin-screw compressor is still better imho (and from others if you read the reviews), especially at higher boost levels. Not sure what the price difference between the SC and TVS would be, I have not seen any prices for the TVS.
Good luck
#7
Trending Topics
#8
![Default](/forum/images/icons/icon1.gif)
Seems to be a severe lack of knowledge about the Eaton?? There is a huge difference between the M90 and the M112. Since the number tells you the volume the super charger displaces. It is also helpful to explain the two different numbers because some blowers are rated in liters. So a M90 is 90 cubic inches. A M112 Is 112 Cubic inches. The M112 is almost 25% larger than the M90-again a huge difference!! Be aware there is a even larger Eaton, the M122 used on GT500 Mustang.
The TVS (Total Vortices Series) that has been talked about also comes in different sizes. The 2.1 Liter is equal to 128 Cubic inches. The 1.9 Liter is 115 cubic inches. So not only is the TVS style blower more efficient it is also larger. The late model Mustang "Super Snake" uses a 2.3 L TVS. This is equal to 140 cubic inches!! Then other brands get even larger. The Whipple (Twin Screw) can come in a 3.4 L version. This is 207 cubic inches!! No wonder they make so much power!!! The TVS is still a type of roots blower and is NOT a twin screw blower. It's kind of a hybrid between the older Eaton roots style and the newer twin screw blowers.
.
.
.
The TVS (Total Vortices Series) that has been talked about also comes in different sizes. The 2.1 Liter is equal to 128 Cubic inches. The 1.9 Liter is 115 cubic inches. So not only is the TVS style blower more efficient it is also larger. The late model Mustang "Super Snake" uses a 2.3 L TVS. This is equal to 140 cubic inches!! Then other brands get even larger. The Whipple (Twin Screw) can come in a 3.4 L version. This is 207 cubic inches!! No wonder they make so much power!!! The TVS is still a type of roots blower and is NOT a twin screw blower. It's kind of a hybrid between the older Eaton roots style and the newer twin screw blowers.
.
.
.
#9
The following users liked this post:
Juiceshakek (11-22-2023)
#10
![Default](/forum/images/icons/icon1.gif)
But I kinda feel guilty modding a car as rare as this S type R, i mean 205 were built in 2003!?! i feel guilty just doing a pulley, port, polish and tune....
#12
#13
![Default](/forum/images/icons/icon1.gif)
This is a totally different engine (not an evolution like from 4.0 to 4.2), trying to use the 1.9 TVS from a 5.0 litre will cost much more to modify imho, inlet/outlet/intercoolers connections are all different, and am sure that the engine fitting is not the same either. Now I think in the STR the front intake would be a good idea, as due to the cramped space, this would give the best airflow. However you would also need to make changes to the front of the engine to allow space for the front intake, and other small stuff like rerouting the EGR etc, so it will not be cheap/easy.
The cheaper solution (If you prefer a TVS over a TS), is to look for a 1.9 TVS with at least a rear inlet so you keep the TB roughly on the same place, check the measurements (width, length), and workout how you will fit the TVS to the engine block. Note that you are limited in length, so the TVS 2.3 will never fit, just too long, have not heard of a 2.1 TVS (only the 2.1L from Kenne Bell), so only option
Good luck
The cheaper solution (If you prefer a TVS over a TS), is to look for a 1.9 TVS with at least a rear inlet so you keep the TB roughly on the same place, check the measurements (width, length), and workout how you will fit the TVS to the engine block. Note that you are limited in length, so the TVS 2.3 will never fit, just too long, have not heard of a 2.1 TVS (only the 2.1L from Kenne Bell), so only option
Good luck
#14
![Default](/forum/images/icons/icon1.gif)
so avos you suggest a TS swap?
There is any place where you posted pics of your swap?
I would see the job involved with this swap
We have a garage and we are tuning racing cars so I could have the help of skilled people to do the job
And many thanks for all you suggestions (past, presence and future)
ciao
There is any place where you posted pics of your swap?
I would see the job involved with this swap
We have a garage and we are tuning racing cars so I could have the help of skilled people to do the job
And many thanks for all you suggestions (past, presence and future)
ciao
#16
![Default](/forum/images/icons/icon1.gif)
@crocodile62
The current bottleneck (so with the 2.1L TS) is the rear intake construction as that puts a constraint on how much you can get out with the supercharger. I am getting the STR soon again for tuning, and can again have a look if it could be improved. Have some ideas, but that cost time. For now the max power is 420 to the wheels (without ECU tune, expect at least 440 with tune). You could get more, but then you get the Eaton effect.
The effect of the intake system is even bigger with the old eaton M112 as that one already needs more power from the engine to drive, which means way more airflow Is needed, and that will create even more vacuum hindering pure hp to the wheels.
So what I am suggesting is that a front intake with the 1.9 TVS could yield possibly more then the KB 2.1L with rear intake. The only problem I think is that you need to find a right casting, and then make major modifications to the whole system as mentioned, and that will be very expensive, also as you need a bigger lower pulley to drive the TVS faster.
It has become a hobby for me to work on tuning our cars better then what is available, and I don’t mind if someone else would make a better system, so am willing to provide info if needed.
For now I think the KB 2.1L would be the best option for the money.
I have most parts ready to make the 2.1L to fit, only for the STR some intake adjustments needs to be made. When I have the STR again I will double check if I can make more improvements, and I think then I could start finalizing the STR Kit.
You can PM me if you are interested.
The current bottleneck (so with the 2.1L TS) is the rear intake construction as that puts a constraint on how much you can get out with the supercharger. I am getting the STR soon again for tuning, and can again have a look if it could be improved. Have some ideas, but that cost time. For now the max power is 420 to the wheels (without ECU tune, expect at least 440 with tune). You could get more, but then you get the Eaton effect.
The effect of the intake system is even bigger with the old eaton M112 as that one already needs more power from the engine to drive, which means way more airflow Is needed, and that will create even more vacuum hindering pure hp to the wheels.
So what I am suggesting is that a front intake with the 1.9 TVS could yield possibly more then the KB 2.1L with rear intake. The only problem I think is that you need to find a right casting, and then make major modifications to the whole system as mentioned, and that will be very expensive, also as you need a bigger lower pulley to drive the TVS faster.
It has become a hobby for me to work on tuning our cars better then what is available, and I don’t mind if someone else would make a better system, so am willing to provide info if needed.
For now I think the KB 2.1L would be the best option for the money.
I have most parts ready to make the 2.1L to fit, only for the STR some intake adjustments needs to be made. When I have the STR again I will double check if I can make more improvements, and I think then I could start finalizing the STR Kit.
You can PM me if you are interested.
#17
#18
![Default](/forum/images/icons/icon1.gif)
This is the problem with the whole TVS thing?? No dyno charts, no 1/4 mile times, no pictures?? Here is the ONLY picture I have been able to find and it's from Eurotoys who supposedly has dropped the entire idea?? The other picture is suppose to be an Arden 4.5L Twin Screw. But I can't really tell??
.
.
.
![](https://www.jaguarforums.com/forum/attachments/s-type-s-type-r-supercharged-v8-x200-15/3729d1275515356-tvs-upgrade-arden-4.5l-twin-screw-supercharger.jpg)
.
.
.
![](https://www.jaguarforums.com/forum/attachments/s-type-s-type-r-supercharged-v8-x200-15/3729d1275515356-tvs-upgrade-arden-4.5l-twin-screw-supercharger.jpg)
![](https://www.jaguarforums.com/forum/attachments/s-type-s-type-r-supercharged-v8-x200-15/3730d1275515356-tvs-upgrade-eurotoys-tvs-cut-away.jpg)