Supercharger Porting Q&A and Resource Thread

[Shane Horning]

Edited my post then* Definitely not starting rumors (or wanting to) about anyone, just posting up back up to the reason of my question. Obviously it was stated wrong from Thornton then about why the blowers got switched.


Sent from my iPhone using Audizine Forum

[Fresh.S4]

Please don't start rumors. I sold that charger to a fellow and his shop, Ostar motorsports, refused to install it because I had the center support removed. They claimed that it wouldn't last more than a few weeks . They funny thing is I have dozens of those ports running without a single issue. Never was there a problem that a fellow ran a good aggressive port and didn't like it.

not saying it doesnt work...i mean its still technically being held by the bearing housing and the gears in the snout.
but it took jokerz a couple years to finally come out and say fill and cut is no bueno. and literally no one ever posted those problems but he said it was enough people complaining on the sidelines to him that he had to r&d a newer port revision (which is like his 4th-5th revision)

so it may work now but only time will tell whats going on. very rare to find anyone now who has had their s4 for more than a few years.
were talking maybe a 3/4" 2mm thick brace, is airflow really gonna change just keeping it for structure integrity?
with the brace in place, i would imagine the rotor pack stays perfectly balanced inside the bearings.
without the brace, id imagine that the rotors would then put unnecessary stress on the bearings/housing because they now are forced to hold the weight of the rotor packs + vibration if that's a real thing... and this actually sounds very plausible because theirs a current thread on the fb pages about why folks are posting pictures of their rotor packs with missing coating and damaged rotor blades.

i also remember that specific post on the fb pages

[Shane Horning]

not saying it doesnt work...i mean its still technically being held by the bearing housing and the gears in the snout.
but it took jokerz a couple years to finally come out and say fill and cut is no bueno. and literally no one ever posted those problems but he said it was enough people complaining on the sidelines to him that he had to r&d a newer port revision (which is like his 4th-5th revision)

so it may work now but only time will tell whats going on. very rare to find anyone now who has had their s4 for more than a few years.
were talking maybe a 3/4" 2mm thick brace, is airflow really gonna change just keeping it for structure integrity?
with the brace in place, i would imagine the rotor pack stays perfectly balanced inside the bearings.
without the brace, id imagine that the rotors would then put unnecessary stress on the bearings/housing because they now are forced to hold the weight of the rotor packs + vibration if that's a real thing... and this actually sounds very plausible because theirs a current thread on the fb pages about why folks are posting pictures of their rotor packs with missing coating and damaged rotor blades.

i also remember that specific post on the fb pages

I completely understand your concerns and that is why I let the brace in unless customer wants it removed however did you know that brace has nothing to do with supporting or keeping the rotor pack centered? It is there to support the housing floor, in no way will it put more stress on the bearings or rotor pack but worse case it could cause the floor to warp. Does it make a power difference? From the tests I did its very small, that's why I rarely remove it.

[sepheroth86]

Missing coating is likely due to thermal expansion from so many dual pulley folks running these blowers well past the recommended 20,000 rpm.

[mahhdd]

Missing coating is likely due to thermal expansion from so many dual pulley folks running these blowers well past the recommended 20,000 rpm.

Some say it's meth injection
Some say it's thermal expansion/heat
The lack of bracing/vibration is a new one to me.

I did see that Facebook thread; but, it's been a while since I last visited.

Interesting thread.

The max rpm rating on a stock blower is 24,000 rpm

[sepheroth86]

Some say it's meth injection
Some say it's thermal expansion/heat
The lack of bracing/vibration is a new one to me.

I did see that Facebook thread; but, it's been a while since I last visited.

Interesting thread.

The max rpm rating on a stock blower is 24,000 rpm

Meth will also eat the epoxy coating.

Eaton says 20,000rpm.

https://www.eaton.com/us/en-us/catal...fications.html

[mahhdd]

Meth will also eat the epoxy coating.

Eaton says 20,000rpm.

https://www.eaton.com/us/en-us/catal...fications.html

That's what they say; but, pretty much everyone else pushes it up to 24,000 for power gains, and it seems to be reliable.

P.S. It's also possible that number has changed. There was a copy+paste from an old thread that showed the 24,000 figure.

[SuitedUp2The9s]

Windshield washer fluid with detergents used as meth seems to eat the rotor coating.

Some good info in regards to meth:
https://prometh.com/blogs/tech/72804...n-supercharger

[sepheroth86]

That's what they say; but, pretty much everyone else pushes it up to 24,000 for power gains, and it seems to be reliable.

P.S. It's also possible that number has changed. There was a copy+paste from an old thread that showed the 24,000 figure.

I would imagine they give themselves some engineering leeway in that figure. However, it doesn't change the fact that the manufacturer of the rotorpack says 20,000.

Regardless, if you look at the compressor map at 20,000rpm it is way outside its ideal range and a larger blower is more suited to move more cfm at a lower blower speed (which also gives us less heat).

[mahhdd]

I would imagine they give themselves some engineering leeway in that figure. However, it doesn't change the fact that the manufacturer of the rotorpack says 20,000.

Regardless, if you look at the compressor map at 20,000rpm it is way outside its ideal range and a larger blower is more suited to move more cfm at a lower blower speed (which also gives us less heat).

Yup, not arguing any of those.

[Fresh.S4]

I would imagine they give themselves some engineering leeway in that figure. However, it doesn't change the fact that the manufacturer of the rotorpack says 20,000.

Regardless, if you look at the compressor map at 20,000rpm it is way outside its ideal range and a larger blower is more suited to move more cfm at a lower blower speed (which also gives us less heat).

exactly this too.
shifts shouldnt be higher than 5k-5500rpms. really no need to ring out the rpms AND the supercharger all for the sake of an extra 20hp.

[mahhdd]

shifts shouldnt be higher than 5k-5500rpms.

..

[tastyratz]

#7 What are the other benefits: You mentioned lower IAT as a benefit. I would say that is a little misleading. People have been claiming this forever (increased efficiency) but has anyone actually proved it ? To me decreased IAT means if I was hitting 60C at the end of a 1/4 mile pre-ported blower then after the port if all other factors are equal I will see less then 60C.

That wasn't what I saw after my ported blower. I saw more boost for sure and my IAT did not skyrocket but it definitely did not go down.

Wouldn't 3-4 additional PSI with no change in IAT's be proof of less heat for the same total psi/cfm/whp? Absolute vs relative.
A PR change to get 4 additional psi would be apples to apples in that respect.

[wrxkyle]

Wouldn't 3-4 additional PSI with no change in IAT's be proof of less heat for the same total psi/cfm/whp? Absolute vs relative.
A PR change to get 4 additional psi would be apples to apples in that respect.

yes that's what he is saying. your iat's wont go down, but your psi will go up.

that doesn't help you if you're bleeding boost from too high of iat's, unless you plan to port just so you can go lower pr for same boost, which isn't the point normally to port.

it's like how a bigger turbo can give you better mpg because it is less of a restriction, but it doesn't because you'll put your food down and get rid of those gains real fast in turn for more smiles.

[RoofRails]

Wouldn't 3-4 additional PSI with no change in IAT's be proof of less heat for the same total psi/cfm/whp? Absolute vs relative.
A PR change to get 4 additional psi would be apples to apples in that respect.

My point was the way people describe the reduced IAT is misleading. You will still be fighting the same IAT issues you had before the ported blower.

[tastyratz]

yes that's what he is saying. your iat's wont go down, but your psi will go up.

that doesn't help you if you're bleeding boost from too high of iat's, unless you plan to port just so you can go lower pr for same boost, which isn't the point normally to port.

it's like how a bigger turbo can give you better mpg because it is less of a restriction, but it doesn't because you'll put your food down and get rid of those gains real fast in turn for more smiles.

Sort of,
More boost means more airflow... which would normally mean more heat to go with the additional airflow from the additional SC rpm. Let's say you wanted to stick to a 24k rpm cap. This lets you get the boost of a higher ratio without pushing over. You're gaining efficiency at the limit where you might have pushed your IAT's to the moon trying to get that via PR. You can reach it at a lower SC rpm which = lower total btu's per cfm.

Not a lower IAT than before but more power without additional IAT. I'd rather port than up the pulley.

[Fresh.S4]

A good port even on a stage 1/ no pulley will still gain you 1-3psi. With no additional heat problems.

[RoofRails]

Sort of,
More boost means more airflow... which would normally mean more heat to go with the additional airflow from the additional SC rpm. Let's say you wanted to stick to a 24k rpm cap. This lets you get the boost of a higher ratio without pushing over. You're gaining efficiency at the limit where you might have pushed your IAT's to the moon trying to get that via PR. You can reach it at a lower SC rpm which = lower total btu's per cfm.

Not a lower IAT than before but more power without additional IAT. I'd rather port than up the pulley.

I agree with this. This is actually the route I went. I'm running Jokers new port ,
APR UC and a 3.17 pulley ratio and its a absolute beast. Only issue I have is that now is having more air then fuel. Seems to be that if you are running a good port and TB near sea level without meth you will most likely be running into fueling problems.

[mahhdd]

Rings have been our Achilles heel. Under excessive heat they grow and the the ring gap closes causing the ring to buckle in on itself scratch the cylinder walls and drop compression. I believe its related to a lean condition but others are saying it's related to cylinder pressure. Oleg was running more boost then any of us for quite some time because he had his fueling figured out. Same for the turbo B8.5 Mario built.

Sent from my SM-N986U using Audizine Forum mobile app

I passed along some info to 034 and they were able to address some of their thoughts on this week's Q&A about the Piston Rings
Check the 46:41 mark

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Js-PvVBZz9A&t=2802s

Worth the listen for anyone in here. They talked about it for a good 10 minutes.

[RoofRails]

I passed along some info to 034 and they were able to address some of their thoughts on this week's Q&A about the Piston Rings
Check the 46:41 mark

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Js-PvVBZz9A&t=2802s

Worth the listen for anyone in here. They talked about it for a good 10 minutes.

I just listened and they said that the rings aren't our issue but fueling was. Good we agree with that and I clearly stated that the excessive heat was a result of a lean condition. By getting caught up in what exactly happens once the cylinder goes lean is not as important as finding out how to prevent that from happening in the first place.

A question I still have though is why is the scored cylinder wall / lost compression on a single cylinder. Is that typical amongst other platforms as well ? I think we have all seen a pattern with cylinder 5 as well. I do see other cylinders joining the party but #5 is a over achiever.

We throw lots of ideas and theories around on these pages and it's often time the debate that spawns a answer or a solution. Thanks for entering into the debate 034, it sounds like this still needs more discussion but we agree it's a fueling issue.


Sent from my SM-N986U using Audizine Forum mobile app

[mahhdd]

My thought is email them. [email protected]

[Fresh.S4]

..

keep ringing that 7200 rpm on a ported dp setup lol.....
(not you specifically, but in general)

[mahhdd]

keep ringing that 7200 rpm on a ported dp setup lol.....
(not you specifically, but in general)

But 5,000 to 5,500 RPM? What pulley ratio are you suggesting here? That's cutting out ~75whp from your shifting that early. So it would be like you're porting to gain ~30whp just to worry and shut down your shift sooner.

7,000+ RPM generates a ton of heat, so I get moving the shift point down between 6,500-7,000... But where did 5,000-5,500 come from?

[hunter_killer]

I just listened and they said that the rings aren't our issue but fueling was. Good we agree with that and I clearly stated that the excessive heat was a result of a lean condition. By getting caught up in what exactly happens once the cylinder goes lean is not as important as finding out how to prevent that from happening in the first place.

A question I still have though is why is the scored cylinder wall / lost compression on a single cylinder. Is that typical amongst other platforms as well ? I think we have all seen a pattern with cylinder 5 as well. I do see other cylinders joining the party but #5 is a over achiever.

We throw lots of ideas and theories around on these pages and it's often time the debate that spawns a answer or a solution. Thanks for entering into the debate 034, it sounds like this still needs more discussion but we agree it's a fueling issue.


Sent from my SM-N986U using Audizine Forum mobile app

The back cylinder (in some odd design) must have issues with fueling, air flow, exhaust flow, cooling, etc in or out of it. Number 8 in small block Mopars were notorious for being out of round, going lean, having issues in general in that cylinder more than any others. MB 5.4 Kompressor’s had issues on number 8 as well if I recall correctly. I think it had to do with fueling and too much heat would build up in the cylinder, I’d have to ask my buddy about it for certain, but I’ve been told that headers helped scavenge the exhaust gasses out a lot better and mostly solved the problem. I’m not Mercedes guy so wether that’s fact or fiction, I’m just adding to the debate.


Sent from my iPhone using Audizine Forum

[mahhdd]

This may sound really, really dumb; but, for LS1 motors, the rear cylinders were problematic as well. It always tends to be the rear pistons it seems... It was explained to me a decade ago that the rush of air going through the intake manifold tended to always hit the back of the motor (air velocity and the air's momentum). So more air would always be in the back of the motor, leaning it out, and it's the ECU and the fuel injectors job to make up for the extra air that's present.

Could it be hotter at the back of the engine bay, too? I'm sure. I just don't know by how much, and whether it makes a difference. I'm curious what the difference in heat is from front to back.

Why only cylinder #5 and not #6? Not sure. Have we seen any #6's go?


Sent from my Pixel 5a using Tapatalk

[sepheroth86]

On old B series Honda engines it is cylinder #2. Gets more air, leans out, melts a piston.

[Shane Horning]

What confuses me tho is I've installed new spark plugs many times and did a few wot pulls then pulled them and they always looked super consistent. However I've never had issues with my personal car with low compression, more knock on certain cylinders or misfiring issues. However with my ported charger and 3.45 pr i always struggle with timing correction across all cylinders in negative da on e40 file,even when blending with race fuel. Not sure what the issue is but that's why I won't run e40 file in cold temps. I've ran 10.3 in 0 da, mabe in negative 3k da I could run 10.1 but I'm not gonna risk blowing my eng.

[RoofRails]

That was my guess on CYL 5. Seeing as it lives between to cylinders it may run hotter then 4 and 6 and possibly bank 2 gets a little less fuel pressure then bank one due to the hard fuel line routing.

[Fresh.S4]

Someone old enough back me up... I could a swore someone posted info that their ARE certain cylinders that get lesser flow then others through the supercharger... I know I read it either here or the fb page.

And what exactly is cold for e40?

[RoofRails]

And what exactly is cold for e40?

The broad answer is the point at which the DA/temps gets low enough that your new found Horsepower has exceeded the capacity of your fuel system. There will be many variables in determining where that point is and it will depend on your mod list and what the current health of your fuel system is. The Low outside air temps that always seem to accompany a low DA are keeping your IAT temps low and that's going to give you all of the available timing your map has to offer which is going to translate to more HP and more fuel needed to support that HP. I don't do 60-130 pulls since I drive a shoe box but having watched how my IAT behaves obsessively I can say that cruising at 60mph in 30F Ambient will drop your starting IAT to a extremely low point and in the time it takes to go 60-130 your heated coolant will not make a full revolution back to your IC bricks. Seems like that activity may be a little more of a test for your fuel system then some other forms of speed metrics. There is a reason they call it boost season !!!

[RoofRails]

And just like that we forgot all about Porting Blowers and turned all our attention to Cylinder # 5. I read a post today about port matching to the blower speed from Brett with Jokers that I thought was interesting and figured I would share it for those of you not on Facebook.

"My idea I had to do with opening up the rotor inlet face in the shape of the rotor profile in relation to the outlet. We went to a depth in the inlet that had a relationship with the outlet. This gives us our inlet duration in relation to the outlet. We later found out after a couple years of studying this inlet will work as LONG AS THE CORRECT RPM IS MATCHED TO INLET DURATION. What's this mean? The amount you port at the rotor face has to match a specific rpm in order to achieve an optimal efficiency range. To much port work will still make power over stock but you are robbing yourself of horsepower of up to 50+ HP and TQ if your not running the correct blower in correlation to port work. Simple saying to remember is more port work takes more horsepower and torque to turn the blower. You may ask the question “can I just spin it harder?”. The answer is yes but what becomes a restriction next, a cooling issue possibly or maybe some broken parts? When you push a supercharger harder you need to make sure your inlet volume is sufficient, make sure your intercooler system is ready for extra heat, throttle body size is adequate, flow post blower is willing to accept the extra air, and most importantly the parts inside the blower taking a toll. For example most of our base ports we sell will work at all levels on a car. I would never sell a high end port job to someone going for a 10% increase in HP cause it will absolutely kill power and wont be beneficial to your needs. Simply put you can make more HP with less pulley keeping the blower cooler and more efficient for a longer period of time".

"There is a range of rpm in every blower platform in which you can range your port work. Would you rather have a complete power band or one peak number that is flat below the curve and barely pulls to rpm? Well I have the answer for that. Our new race ports now utilize the proper duration of inlet duration based on that persons blower rpm. We ask you your pulley combo and we port the blower to your pulley combo. We tailor your blower for your application resulting in the best possible performance for your car. Note if the port work is tailored for a specific blower rpm DOES NOT MEAN it wont work with other pulley combos. However I would not go selling a guy with a .10 smaller pulley then stock a race package port!
My ideas worked by hand but couldn't be brought to their full potential unless a CNC could help profile, remove and design the inlet material I wanted or needed. I want to thank LMT for the talent they bring to my business".

[mahhdd]

I 100% have curbed the idea of going ported blower until the JXB PI kit gets ironed out

I wasn't at that point anyways though.

[sepheroth86]

I 100% have curbed the idea of going ported blower until the JXB PI kit gets ironed out

I wasn't at that point anyways though.

Might as well get the Merc blower upgrade vs porting the stock blower. If one is waiting for port injection. Since the issue with ported blower and a larger blower both will need more fuel.

And the bigger blower is likely to make a lot more power.

[Fresh.S4]

i saw bretts statement as well. all that really means i think is that the bearing housing needs to be shaped like a ball sack so that it matches the rifling on the rotors. none of us are hitting 50+hp gain from a port so it doesn't really all apply to us with this specific statement and of course a port needs a larger matched tb for flow.
I really dont see the merc blower being a game changer. The cost is going to be VERY high (if the custom jokerz bricks gives any idea of pricing on just those) and to add to that, theirs already a few larger custom chargers floating around and you NEVER hear about them.
port injection is promising but by the time they go out, all the big boy players will have already moved on because of blown motors and getting out of the game.
their isnt much of any problem with "fueling" if folks can discipline themselves on pump gas/ race gas. the problem is, folks are challenging ethanol and DA (supposedly)

[hunter_killer]

Might as well get the Merc blower upgrade vs porting the stock blower. If one is waiting for port injection. Since the issue with ported blower and a larger blower both will need more fuel.

And the bigger blower is likely to make a lot more power.

JXB PI will be out a long time before Jose’s blower. I haven’t seen or heard of an update on it for quite some time. Last I asked was back in late November though…Just checked and haven’t seen anything about the B8 supercharger. Guess we will continue to wait.


Sent from my iPhone using Audizine Forum

[mahhdd]

The issue with aftermarket blowers will be "who will develop a tune to support them?"

I don't think there are many who are serious looking to drop $6,000+++ on a new blower... Especially when we're running into power ceiling issues... OTS tuners aren't going to be like, "Oh wow! A new blower is out. Let's dump time and resources into making a new set of tunes for the 5 people who actually want to do this over 3 years. I hope they pick us!!!"

Edited: Relevant 034 Response

VPS 3.0t Blower Kit - $9,995 - Not including other supporting mods. Includes a Tune.

[hunter_killer]

People who want to keep pushing their car more will find a way to get a tune. Regardless of OTS support or not. Wouldn’t be different if someone went and did a turbo swap. That person will get a tune for that setup. Now with a bigger blower, didn’t 034 way in a live chat or two day that a bigger blower tune wasn’t needed in a sense? The factory ecm could cover what was needed to function, again it would be just like a ported blower with hopefully better cooling/ efficiency? Fueling again would still the big issue. Now a turbo swap would be different for a tune to get the most out of it. Regardless this platform should’ve taken off long time ago and only now is stuff like JXB coming along with much needed items. If Jose’s blower does actually come to fruition and actually does a lot better than anything else it’ll take off.


Sent from my iPhone using Audizine Forum

[tpivette89]

I 100% have curbed the idea of going ported blower until the JXB PI kit gets ironed out

I wasn't at that point anyways though.

If you are planning on sticking to pump 93 then you don't have to worry about running out of fuel on a ported blower setup. It's only the guys running E40 tunes, in extreme DA, with certain pulley ratios, that are experiencing this. It's a very narrow set of variables that cause this, and it shouldn't make people shy away from ported blowers.

Stock, Stage 1, and Stage 2 cars will benefit from having their blowers ported with zero risk. Only when you begin to push the limits with this platform does the fuel issue present itself. As always, your results may vary, and dedicated logging will reveal any problems with your setup.

[BrokeBichB8]

i saw bretts statement as well. all that really means i think is that the bearing housing needs to be shaped like a ball sack so that it matches the rifling on the rotors. none of us are hitting 50+hp gain from a port so it doesn't really all apply to us with this specific statement and of course a port needs a larger matched tb for flow.
I really dont see the merc blower being a game changer. The cost is going to be VERY high (if the custom jokerz bricks gives any idea of pricing on just those) and to add to that, theirs already a few larger custom chargers floating around and you NEVER hear about them.
port injection is promising but by the time they go out, all the big boy players will have already moved on because of blown motors and getting out of the game.
their isnt much of any problem with "fueling" if folks can discipline themselves on pump gas/ race gas. the problem is, folks are challenging ethanol and DA (supposedly)

The hard part of that is "what is the race/pump gas octane requirement for the e40 tune?" Gotta be familiar enough with alchy/ethanol to have an idea how to get there.

[RoofRails]

i saw bretts statement as well. all that really means i think is that the bearing housing needs to be shaped like a ball sack so that it matches the rifling on the rotors. none of us are hitting 50+hp gain from a port so it doesn't really all apply to us with this specific statement and of course a port needs a larger matched tb for flow.
I really dont see the merc blower being a game changer. The cost is going to be VERY high (if the custom jokerz bricks gives any idea of pricing on just those) and to add to that, theirs already a few larger custom chargers floating around and you NEVER hear about them.
port injection is promising but by the time they go out, all the big boy players will have already moved on because of blown motors and getting out of the game.
their isnt much of any problem with "fueling" if folks can discipline themselves on pump gas/ race gas. the problem is, folks are challenging ethanol and DA (supposedly)

I do believe this statement applies to us. Its not just the shape of them, its the amount of rotor face you are exposing.
This was the approach he took on his latest port revision. The idea was to get away from the 3.4+ PR. Maybe my Q5 is not the norm, but I made significant gains with his latest port and an 80mm throttle body at a 3.17 pulley ratio. I would bet it's approaching 50hp at the crank.

Sent from my SM-N986U using Audizine Forum mobile app