Let's have a moment of silence for my GT's.............

[Apollo]

Believe it or not I might go TT only after the rebuild to get more peak hp. Apollo is in my sights.

:eek (Scotty, I need more power - I mean Kendall...:willy
Actually I feel fortunate to have been able to squeak by you into that first place. I have little doubt there will be a reshuffle at the next Mile. Wish I could be mixing it up with you guys but I am going to try and get there to watch. Did you guys find out about RV parking for Texas?
Hey, maybe I can get Soroush to help me put ... nah:lol

 

[Mullet]

Nothing from the mile about RV parking.

I wonder if they would tech my RV so I can run that?

 

[tmcphail]

Believe it or not I might go TT only after the rebuild to get more peak hp. Apollo is in my sights.

Hey come on now can't someone come in here and do something a little different ?:willy

 

[BlackICE]

I think Mullet (please correct if I am wrong) had the OEM supercharger and OEM pulley. However, he was force-feeding the blower a boatload of pressure from twin turbos. We're probably gonna need someone like INDY to help us out with the calculations, but work-wise that SC was doing a lot. In OEM configuration, the SC's task is to take atmospheric pressure up to a measured 10-12psi. In the TT+SC set-up, the SC is being "fed" 20+ psi form the turbos and then it is cranking the net up to 25-29psi that the engine sees. From a work perspective, the SC is doing a lot more than it would in an OEM application, so I wouldn't worry at all if I was OEM (or OEM + pulley).

I would love to get Indy's input too.

But IMO the size/PSI/work of the supercharger isn't really the main concern when in comes to the longevity of the crank snout, because the blower is driven by a serpentine belt which has some slip and elasticity in the driving the blower. The effective rotational inertia of the balancer and the peak rotation acceleration and deceleration of the crank have have more do with crank keyway failures. Now the peak accel/decel are generally greater whenever the output torque is increase, regardless of if it is a blower or TT.

Ideally the press fit of the balancer to crank should be tight enough so that the keyway is only a locating device. Keyways should not be used as primary drive mechanism. Although it seem to be done in all the time in the non-OEM world.

A day ago I posted a thread with links shaft keyways that will give you a headache.

 

[B.M.F.]

Colvin automotive in Austin has an upgraded lower pulley that extends further onto the crank. It also has an additional key and the keys are longer. They have the details on crank machining. They had a problem with a lower running 18 plus on their whipple.

This makes no sense. Unless they are making the crank longer there is no way to make the balencer fit onto the crank more as the balancer mates up against the timing wheel which inreturn mates up against the lower timing gear. The crank snount is a hair over a 1'' long.

Also Black ICE Mod motors do not have the tightest press for the balencers. A pushrod motor is such a pain in the ass compared to a mod motor to put the balencer on and to take it off. A tighter fit would also help. But then you would have to go aftermarket with the balencer.

 

[nota4re]

Now the peak accel/decel are generally greater whenever the output torque is increase, regardless of if it is a blower or TT.

Yeah right. Driving another 150-200HP off of the front of the crank probably has nuthin' to do with FRONT KEYWAY crankshaft failures. Dream on.

 

[Apollo]

Hey come on now can't someone come in here and do something a little different ?:willy

I am still wondering what Mark has up his sleeve.:secret:

 

[MarkH]

I am wondering what I have up my sleeve as well. All I have to report so far is the car was delivered back to the shop on Friday from having the cage wrapped in suede and as of today, the motor is in and the turbos are running. The car came to life today. Still some work ahead but it's getting good. :rofl

 

[BlackICE]

Yeah right. Driving another 150-200HP off of the front of the crank probably has nuthin' to do with FRONT KEYWAY crankshaft failures. Dream on.

Far from nothing, but not the primary cause of failure.

Here is an homework assignment, assuming 200 HP off to drive the blower at 6500 RPM (BTW, way high IMO for 20 PSI) what is the average tension on the blower belt at 6500 RPM? If you don't know the answer, how can you assert it is causing the keyway to fail?

Very few cranks have failed and they are not all were on blown motors. Whenever you mod a car from stock you run the increased risk of failures reguardless of if it is a blower or TT, or SC/TT.

 

[nota4re]

Tell you what, Clinton, I couldn't tell you how hot the sun is with any kind of precision, but I know I'm gonna melt before I get there. Call me gifted.

Very few cranks have failed and they are not all were on blown motors.

Really, can you remind me of one that wasn't? I wasn't even aware we had any non-blown motors on the forum (besides Ray's rocket).

Whenever you mod a car from stock you run the increased risk of failures reguardless of if it is a blower or TT, or SC/TT.

Ahhhh, so all of these mods are completely equal in terms of loads on the engine and probability for increased failure possibilities? Is this really what you are saying? If so, I think we can start a whole new thread to debate this because my opinion and those of many others is that there are lots of pluses and minuses of each type of modification. If it is not what you are saying, then I wonder how such a generic statement is a contribution in the thread.

 

[B.M.F.]

Lookin Good Mark!!!!