General Supercharger Thread

Looks like my SCOL box to me.

 

There is your Raptor "comparison" @1UP at least in intent. It doesn't meet the power levels though.

 

But can a Raptor do this???

https://youtu.be/PcyDILBgtdo

 

Holy shite the driver was committed to a full send.

Missed opportunity to get sponsored by Red Bull

 

Is this new TVS2650 S/C carb legal still?

 

Wish Magnuson had a shop that people could take their truck and have them do the install instead of the other route where the shop wants you to add this and that and a different pump and injectors.

Just would like to see real world application nothing more nothing less? Even in the video they tell about everything they added including this that and the other thing! and 37 inch tires.???

it does sound like they have settled the heat down a bit and with this new one more spin with less effort? and the MAF has been taken care of with bigger pipe.

 

$2k and give me the kit and I'll install it, I won't even pester you about all the other shit besides telling you the stock tune sucks ass

 

$1800 and I'll install it, then send you to Sniv for a tune lol

 

This video is great and hits on so many things we discuss in this thread from TVS, to twin screw, to turbos, to blower sizing based on application. Some of the product info and data is of course a little outdated since it’s 7 years old, but definitely still relevant and worth the watch.
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=-UzDP-7Rmvc&pp=ygURdHZzIHZzIHR3aW4gc2NyZXc=

 

Yes it'll require a tech tool of sort to plug into your obd2 or ecu and select the appropriate settings for trans relearn is what I was told.

 

Do you know if that would mess up my existing tune?

 

It should not, as your not resetting the ecu or anything from my understanding, but any reputable trans shop or prospeed can give you some specific insight if the internet or your local toyota dealer can't help you.

 

I think a full battery drain will cause a relearn as well. We did it a few times during tuning with OTT. disconnect both cables from battery, and touch them together for like 30 seconds to drain the capacitors. Or just leave battery unplugged for at least 20 minutes

Only cause I didn't have the techstream tool to use

 

I would do this method as a last resort.

 

It has a carb # according to the site

 

Watching that video, lots of very cool information! And he touches on specifically running a smaller supercharger and picking where you want the most efficiency out of the system which is why the smaller displacements are used in a lot of applications since it gives more punch down low instead of chasing peak power, which seems to match some of the data we've seen of the 1.9L possibly hitting harder off the line. He also mentions spinning faster usually gets more pumping efficiency due to less leakage of the rotors at higher speed. Additionally he states the TVS is the most efficient supercharger setup he knows of, granted the guy worked for Eaton and then Magnuson so is trying to help push their product. Would be curious what their reasoning for going to the 2650 is, maybe it's just driven by the market conception that bigger is better and it's easier to sell peak power numbers.

A lot more to the story than just raw displacement, similar to comparing two different engines of different displacement.

 

I asked Magnuson if the calibration has changed with the new Superchargers and their reply was that the calibration did not change just the hardware.

with regards to above,, in one of the videos they mentioned this new product spun faster/easier which takes less power to produce more power plus the Supercharger runs cooler which produces less heat. I imagine with the new design of less power to spin and running cooler it was time for a change (new cooling) you know out with the old in with the new. They need a newer product?

 

Harrop has had this "innovation" for 2 years now. Weird marketing.

 

I emailed sales @ 7am yesterday, asking for the SC only price, crickets

 

I think the big part is the new cooling setup.

 

I think generally the 2650 came about because the crowd demanded it, as you said due to the popular opinion of bigger is better. I believe it’s utilization on engines that in the past some would say it was too large for has now improved a bit with the latest technology applied to the 2650. I think with that with said technology, you give up less on the lower rpm range running the larger blower than you would have with larger designs of the past. That said, I don’t disagree that the 1900 is probably a good size for a tundra (truck) engine for most people, unless you’re looking to up the boost on the 2650 to the range where you’re using at least the 80mm, or preferably even smaller pulley to get it operating in the efficiency range for longer periods.

So far as I can tell, the new magnuson is super nice but has no inherent benefits over the Harrop as far as design. I had read in some comments section regarding the new blower release that Magnusons tooling for making the 1900 for the tundra was super worn out, but demand was still high. For this reason they just invested in the tooling and built a new blower around the larger 2650 rotor pack since that’s what everyone seems to want anyway, and all the competition is larger.

 

again...harrop has a much better cooling setup. and has for 2 years.

 

That might change now? maybe?

 

I'm not casting stones @ Mag.

they have a great product.

just saying Harrop had all this tech, 2 years ago. @ViktorG did a nice vid on the cooling capacities.

 

That Youtube nuked, damn them!!!!!!!

 

That's the reasoning I heard about the 3.4L Taco/4R. Tooling worn out and still demand for the product. Too bad the 4.0 hasn't gotten the same treatment yet

 

I was bored and curious…With a lot of annoying math conversions, and figuring out pressure ratio at each 1k engine rpm interval from 1-6k by watching a replay of my boost gauge to redline I was able to plot my efficiency curve on the 2650 compressor map on the 80mm pulley. It may be a little muddy at the 1k rpm area as I guessed 3psi at that range to calculate pressure ratio (didn’t have a true reading). It’s hard to read, so cliff notes for efficiency for each engine rpm is:

1k - 65%
2k - 66%
3k - 69%
4K - 70%
5k - 70%
6k - 69%

Considering the peak efficiency island is 70%, I won’t complain about that! It’s right in there for a lot of the rev range. If anyone else would like theirs plotted I can probably do it if you have your pulley size and know your boost reading at each 1k rpm interval. It’s nerdy, but cool!

 

If I had a dollar every time he says "actually", I'd have 3 of these trucks.

That said, it's a very nice build and I'm a little

 

Is there a benefit to the RCF TB & how involved is the mod?

 

I actually can't unhear that now....