Interesting Video of when C32 Supercharger kicks in and stays on - Page 2

May 9, 2011 | 11:53 AM

#26

c32used

MBWorld Fanatic!

Joined: Feb 2006

Posts: 6,213

Likes: 8

LET C32 2002

Well thanks guys for this lesson...it's always nice to learn more and more...I wasn't big on cams, headers, etc due to cost without enough gains for me but
it's nice to know those options are still available to me. Thanks

May 9, 2011 | 12:10 PM

#27

mikekuriger

Super Member

Joined: Jun 2008

Posts: 855

Likes: 1

2010 C63

Yea, people often go nuts when they spend money on cams, head work, headers, etc and then "lost" 5+ psi of boost from their supercharger. This is actually a good thing! The SC is still pumping the same CFM of air, but now the engine can digest more of it and make more power.

Of course, if you have a turbo and do the same mods, the turbo will have to work harder to achieve the preset-boost regulated by a wastegate. This can cause the turbo to fail because it requires higher rpm to make the same boost since the CFM has increased.

May 9, 2011 | 01:30 PM

#28

Autotechnica

Senior Member

Joined: Aug 2010

Posts: 347

Likes: 0

From: Ontario, Canada

2002 C32 AMG

Quote:

Originally Posted by splinter

^ mikekuriger nailed it.

Know you’ve achieved increased output on your 318i with a roots blower.

The C32’s Lysholm is far more efficient.

http://kennebell.net/KBWebsite/Commo...romcatalog.pdf
http://kennebell.net/KBWebsite/Commo...efficiency.pdf

meh, guess it's pointless to complain about heatsoak on a S/C that produces 1 bar of boost. I still think more things should have been done from the factory to address the heat soak issues. Why is the same coolant being used to cool the motor, heat exchanger and transmission?! I have a strong feeling it's why the C32 kompressor motor was short lived. The power gains from the S/C are impressive. However, I would prefer consistent power delivery any day over higher output. BTW, keep in mind the 318 (M42) put out around 138HP crank stock! ouch. However, I never ran into any heatsoak issues. Power delivery was always consistent, on and off the track.

Bry

Last edited by Autotechnica; May 9, 2011 at 01:32 PM.

May 9, 2011 | 03:00 PM

#29

Newzchspy

MBWorld Fanatic!

Joined: Mar 2008

Posts: 4,165

Likes: 4

PLAID

Quote:

Originally Posted by mikekuriger

your assumption would be wrong. The supercharger engages at approx 1800 rpm. It completely disengages under 1800 rpm. (unless you're in park of course)

You wouldn't want to leave the SC disengaged all the time, not only would you get no boost but now you have a large restriction in your intake airflow.

There is no "low amperage" feature on the sc clutch. It's on or off.

+1, Mike is correct, its either OFF or ON and when its off (our lil experiment) it makes that 3.2 feel like a boat anchor. It'll run BUT not very well. Gas mileage did not really increase either. The whole key is the magnetic clutch. Its a shame there is no variable way to run it, BUT its like a 1800 RPM light switch.