W211 AMG Discuss the W211 AMG's such as the E55 and the E63

Twin Turbo Charge our 55's?

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Rate Thread
 
Old Sep 29, 2006 | 01:53 PM
  #76  
medici78's Avatar
MBWorld Fanatic!
 
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 1,764
Likes: 3
From: El Paso, TX
'03 G500, '13 G63, '17 GLS63,
Originally Posted by saman6164
The lag you guys are talking about is way overrated. I have a single supra with a 74mm ITS turbo and I have 18lbs of boost by 4300rpm. Now this is with 272 cams which makes it laggier than if it was stock cams. Also we are talking about a 3L engine. The supra guys going to a 3.4L stroker engine shave about 300-500rpm on their lag with the same turbo setup. So I can't imagine how our engine with its size and a pair of GT30R's would have any lag problems. I would drop $15k in a heartbeat. I live in Jacksonville and my car is serviced by Stage6 same guys that did the Ford GT TT and they charge $30K for the TT setup for the GT. There is no way they will do it for half for our cars.
I give HUGE props to Stage6 for the accomplishment on the Ford GT TT. However, I'm sure the $30k included all development costs, trial and error, etc. What makes the build so impressive, in my eyes, is the simplicity of the upgrade.

What Joe claims he paid vs cost of parts and labor still leaves much to speculation. There is no way they used more than $10k (retail) worth of piping, turbos and misc parts to complete the build. They used the stock intercooler, stock fuel system (injectors excepted, I believe), stock exhaust,
even stock manifolds!! From the looks of it, the turbos and associated piping are in place of the OEM exhaust system. Now that the original prototype is done, there is a guide to go by. The first build is always going to take much longer than subsequent ones. If this one took them 200 hours, the next one will only take 50, probably much less since trial and error is no longer a factor.
Figure he paid $90/hr for the labor, and it makes sense that it would cost $30k. However, he ate all the development costs considering it was a one-off build. If one was to mass market the system, $15k would leave a very good margin.
This is why I think a similar system at $15k for the E55 is more than feasible and makes more sense. Your average E55 ENTHUSIAST (lets face it, the average owner will leave well enough alone, lol) won't spend $30k to TT their ride. However, if you promise reliable 600+rwhp performance for $15k it begins to look VERY attractive.
Reply
Old Sep 29, 2006 | 02:50 PM
  #77  
BoBcanada's Avatar
MBWorld Fanatic!
 
Joined: Feb 2002
Posts: 2,793
Likes: 0
From: Toronto,ON
AMG
Originally Posted by medici78
I give HUGE props to Stage6 for the accomplishment on the Ford GT TT. However, I'm sure the $30k included all development costs, trial and error, etc. What makes the build so impressive, in my eyes, is the simplicity of the upgrade.

What Joe claims he paid vs cost of parts and labor still leaves much to speculation. There is no way they used more than $10k (retail) worth of piping, turbos and misc parts to complete the build. They used the stock intercooler, stock fuel system (injectors excepted, I believe), stock exhaust,
even stock manifolds!! From the looks of it, the turbos and associated piping are in place of the OEM exhaust system. Now that the original prototype is done, there is a guide to go by. The first build is always going to take much longer than subsequent ones. If this one took them 200 hours, the next one will only take 50, probably much less since trial and error is no longer a factor.
Figure he paid $90/hr for the labor, and it makes sense that it would cost $30k. However, he ate all the development costs considering it was a one-off build. If one was to mass market the system, $15k would leave a very good margin.
This is why I think a similar system at $15k for the E55 is more than feasible and makes more sense. Your average E55 ENTHUSIAST (lets face it, the average owner will leave well enough alone, lol) won't spend $30k to TT their ride. However, if you promise reliable 600+rwhp performance for $15k it begins to look VERY attractive.
+1

E55 + reliable 600 rwhp is a keeper sign me up.
Reply
Old Sep 29, 2006 | 03:18 PM
  #78  
G55K's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Joined: May 2004
Posts: 466
Likes: 32
Originally Posted by blackbenzz
The clk55 has a compression ratio of 10.5:1 It is not the same engine as the 211 E55. It was not built for boost but you can try it and then let me know . I'm happy with my kleemann for now, just want to squeeze out a little more hp to get me into the 11's and i'll be satisfied.
Can you take the pistons from the kompressor 55 engine and drop them into the NA 55 engine? I believe that the blocks, etc., are the same and this would be an easy way to lower the compression of the NA engine.
Reply
Old Sep 29, 2006 | 04:26 PM
  #79  
Mad TKD's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Joined: Jun 2005
Posts: 408
Likes: 0
I dont think the blocks are that close. You would need more than that probably. Most FI blocks have more cooling and oiling passages than its similar NA engine.

BTW Vrus I also have locally someone that can make a Sheet metal Intake!!!!
Reply
Old Sep 29, 2006 | 04:34 PM
  #80  
vrus's Avatar
Banned
 
Joined: May 2004
Posts: 3,797
Likes: 2
From: Richmond Hill, Ontario
2003 E55 AMG
Ok guys... Time for me to spill some more info.. Here is the lo-down...

I have been collaborating with 2 people about this project on and off for the past few weeks.. I didnt want to mention names because nothing was solidified..

DerekFSU, MarkoCL55 and myself are working together to bring a TT kit out for the E55, SL55, and CL55 cars. Using Marko's experience in building one of the fastest Supra in the country and also from building & fabricating TT kits for other cars, he is helping me to put together the ultimate TT kit for the E55.

DerekFSU's car will be the prototype & development car. We have a fulltime fabricator & mechanic that was hired and he will be working on Derek's car to build the system. We have decided to built the kit as a pair of turbos that will bolt onto the car and KEEP the S/C. Yes.. That's right... 2 x Turbos + Compressor = TONNES OF FUN & GIGGLES!!!

Once we are done, Derek will be using his skills as a driver to see what we can get out of this kit and will be doing all the 1/4mile testing for us. The goal is to hit 10sec 1/4 with the Stage 1 kit.

From the testing we have done, we know the stock fuel system and engine can support 750hp.. We dont have CONCRETE facts on the longevity aspects but we know it will support that HP level.

For Stage 1 I am aiming for 650rwhp and will be priced UNDER $10K.. I am aiming for $7999 street price but I will know more as we get into the development of it.

For Stage 2 I am aiming for 800rwhp. It will include revised heads, different turbos or turbo profiles, and an upgraded intercooler system. Pricing to be determined..

The benefits of this kit will be:

- The car can be returned to stock in a few hours if needed. Once the Turbo kit is removed the car will function as it did from the factory. That was the main reason we decided to keep the S/C and just add Turbos onto the existing car.

- Plug & play install so to speak. Everything including the custom ECU tune will be provided. It will be made to go onto a completely bone stock car or one that already has Pullies, Headers, etc..

We are hoping that in the next 2 months the prototype kit will be complete and we will have a running car @ the Stage 1 power levels.

I am doing the head work R&D in parallel so that we will have those ready when its time to go for Stage 2.
Reply
Old Sep 29, 2006 | 04:55 PM
  #81  
medici78's Avatar
MBWorld Fanatic!
 
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 1,764
Likes: 3
From: El Paso, TX
'03 G500, '13 G63, '17 GLS63,
650rwhp for $7999??? Return to stock when finished?? COUNT ME IN!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Reply
Old Sep 29, 2006 | 05:00 PM
  #82  
BoBcanada's Avatar
MBWorld Fanatic!
 
Joined: Feb 2002
Posts: 2,793
Likes: 0
From: Toronto,ON
AMG
now im not sure if i should place my ml63 order... Thats gonna be one happy new year for some folks!!!!!

Victor is the Santa this year !!!
Reply
Old Sep 29, 2006 | 05:04 PM
  #83  
Vadim @ FD's Avatar
Banned
 
Joined: Mar 2006
Posts: 2,855
Likes: 2
From: Southern California
S600TT, R350
Someone needs to flow the heads to see where the limit is.
Stock port is at 140 cfm at 0.450'', simple cleanup and it is at 180 cfm. With some more extensive work 200s are possible.

2 x Turbos + Compressor = TONNES OF FUN & GIGGLES!!!
Ahh, you remembered!!!

IMHO a single turbo might be better, due to space constraints and restricted heads.
Reply
MB World Stories

The Best of Mercedes & AMG

story-0

6 Mercedes Models That Did NOT Age Well (But Are Somehow Still Cool)

 Verdad Gallardo
story-1

Manual Mercedes? 6 Times Sindelfingen Let Drivers Have All The Fun

 Verdad Gallardo
story-2

Mercedes SLR McLaren 722 S Is Extremely Rare Example Modified by McLaren

 Verdad Gallardo
story-3

8 Classic Boxy Mercedes Designs That Have Aged Like Fine Wine

 Verdad Gallardo
story-4

Flawlessly Restored Mercedes 190E Evo II Heads to Auction

 Verdad Gallardo
story-5

Electric Mercedes C-Class Unveiled: 11 Things You Need to Know

 Verdad Gallardo
story-6

Mercedes EQS Gets A Major Update: Everything You Need to Know

 Verdad Gallardo
story-7

5 Underrated Mercedes-Benz Models That Don't Get the Love They Deserve

 Verdad Gallardo
story-8

Mercedes 300D Has Pushed Well Past 1 Million Miles and It Ain't Stopping

 Verdad Gallardo
story-9

10 Most Reliable Mercedes-Benz Models You Can Buy Used

 Verdad Gallardo
Old Sep 29, 2006 | 05:08 PM
  #84  
BoBcanada's Avatar
MBWorld Fanatic!
 
Joined: Feb 2002
Posts: 2,793
Likes: 0
From: Toronto,ON
AMG
can anyone tell me whats the advantage of keeping the supercharger?
Reply
Old Sep 29, 2006 | 05:08 PM
  #85  
Mad TKD's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Joined: Jun 2005
Posts: 408
Likes: 0
vrus what is the need or want to keep the SC? Is it because of not wanting to develope a Intake?

If I were to do this I would want a TT version.

check your pm vrus
Reply
Old Sep 29, 2006 | 05:19 PM
  #86  
G55K's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Joined: May 2004
Posts: 466
Likes: 32
Originally Posted by vrus
Ok guys... Time for me to spill some more info.. Here is the lo-down...

I have been collaborating with 2 people about this project on and off for the past few weeks.. I didnt want to mention names because nothing was solidified..

DerekFSU, MarkoCL55 and myself are working together to bring a TT kit out for the E55, SL55, and CL55 cars. Using Marko's experience in building one of the fastest Supra in the country and also from building & fabricating TT kits for other cars, he is helping me to put together the ultimate TT kit for the E55.

DerekFSU's car will be the prototype & development car. We have a fulltime fabricator & mechanic that was hired and he will be working on Derek's car to build the system. We have decided to built the kit as a pair of turbos that will bolt onto the car and KEEP the S/C. Yes.. That's right... 2 x Turbos + Compressor = TONNES OF FUN & GIGGLES!!!

Once we are done, Derek will be using his skills as a driver to see what we can get out of this kit and will be doing all the 1/4mile testing for us. The goal is to hit 10sec 1/4 with the Stage 1 kit.

From the testing we have done, we know the stock fuel system and engine can support 750hp.. We dont have CONCRETE facts on the longevity aspects but we know it will support that HP level.

For Stage 1 I am aiming for 650rwhp and will be priced UNDER $10K.. I am aiming for $7999 street price but I will know more as we get into the development of it.

For Stage 2 I am aiming for 800rwhp. It will include revised heads, different turbos or turbo profiles, and an upgraded intercooler system. Pricing to be determined..

The benefits of this kit will be:

- The car can be returned to stock in a few hours if needed. Once the Turbo kit is removed the car will function as it did from the factory. That was the main reason we decided to keep the S/C and just add Turbos onto the existing car.

- Plug & play install so to speak. Everything including the custom ECU tune will be provided. It will be made to go onto a completely bone stock car or one that already has Pullies, Headers, etc..

We are hoping that in the next 2 months the prototype kit will be complete and we will have a running car @ the Stage 1 power levels.

I am doing the head work R&D in parallel so that we will have those ready when its time to go for Stage 2.
Guys,

You might want to re-think the idea of twincharging (supercharger + turbos). In theory it sounds like a great idea becasue you get the low end torque of a supercharger and the upper end power of a turbo. I've attached some pictures of my Evolution 8. It's a twincharged design and took ever 18 months to build and tune properly. I live in Colorado so I needed the supercharger to help spool this huge turbo. At my altitude this would have been a lag monster.

The system worked well but was high maintainence and big bucks. It's not near as simple as you think. The supercharger has to be bypassed at some point in order for designed power numbers to be reached. Also, be prepared for major heat! The intercooler system in itself was a huge feat of engineering. The supercharger that I used should look familar as it was made by Kleemann's OEM partner. Kleemann actual helped designed some of the components and ideas used for this car but the majority of the work was done by Brandon G.'s buddy Roberto Arano from www.union7.net. Roberto is scary smart when it comes to radical tuning ideas.

In addition, the E55 is already traction limited and has enough displacement to spool large turbos and put down decent low end power without the kompressor. Remove the supercharger and you'll reduce weight, heat, complexity, and you'll hook up better at launch. I'd be willing to bet pinks (j/k) that a well engineered twin turbo E55 would smoke a twincharged (supercharger and twin turbos) E55 at the drag strip and on the street.

Trust me, the engineering on this project to make it work properly is going to be huge. My advice is to bail on the supercharger or call Roberto and be prepared to spend big bucks and lot sof time. Please feel free to ask any questions on my twin charge design and I'll try to answer them.

Good luck!



http://72.41.83.159/images/st-anima-opt.gif

Last edited by G55K; Sep 29, 2006 at 05:34 PM.
Reply
Old Sep 29, 2006 | 05:29 PM
  #87  
dsc's Avatar
dsc
Super Member
 
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 953
Likes: 2
2004 E55
Originally Posted by vrus
For Stage 1 I am aiming for 650rwhp and will be priced UNDER $10K.. I am aiming for $7999 street price but I will know more as we get into the development of it.

Now that finally sounds awesome in the world of more E55 power. I'm in.

What about us guys infected with the MB ECU problem. Can you tune around that?
Reply
Old Sep 29, 2006 | 05:30 PM
  #88  
Mad TKD's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Joined: Jun 2005
Posts: 408
Likes: 0
G55k only 1 of your links is working!!

I also agree with what your saying G55k. I know Marko has had a great Supra but this is no supra

Plenty of displacement to spool turbos. Can you say twin 61mm. 1 of my sources says 800rwhp(on race fuel and higher boost) is possible depending on alot of things of course. The A/R would be small so lag would be small too. Then if thats to much then twin 57mm.

I dont really think the car crazy guys cares that you can change it back so quickly. If you are going this route then the best way is just to TT it.
Reply
Old Sep 29, 2006 | 05:35 PM
  #89  
G55K's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Joined: May 2004
Posts: 466
Likes: 32
Originally Posted by Mad TKD
G55k only 1 of your links is working!!

I also agree with what your saying G55k. I know Marko has had a great Supra but this is no supra

Plenty of displacement to spool turbos. Can you say twin 61mm. 1 of my sources says 800rwhp(on race fuel and higher boost) is possible depending on alot of things of course. The A/R would be small so lag would be small too. Then if thats to much then twin 57mm.

I dont really think the car crazy guys cares that you can change it back so quickly. If you are going this route then the best way is just to TT it.
Sorry about that. I deleted the bad links and I'll try to repost them.
Reply
Old Sep 29, 2006 | 05:37 PM
  #90  
blackbenzz's Avatar
Out Of Control!!
20 Year Member
Liked
Loved
Community Favorite
 
Joined: Feb 2003
Posts: 13,489
Likes: 96
haters crazy
Why couldnt you guys tell me this last week BEFORE I bought my new car. I will stay tuned and if things work out, I'll pick up a E55 and sned you a check vrus!
Reply
Old Sep 29, 2006 | 05:45 PM
  #91  
G55K's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Joined: May 2004
Posts: 466
Likes: 32
Originally Posted by blackbenzz
Why couldnt you guys tell me this last week BEFORE I bought my new car. I will stay tuned and if things work out, I'll pick up a E55 and sned you a check vrus!
Make sure that your check is signed but left blank. Trust me, bolting two turbos on a supercharged car is not nearly as simple as it sounds. It can be done, and it's been done before, but it doesn't make any sense in this application. If done correctly it's big bucks and you still won't have the performance of a twin turbo'd car without the supercharger.
Reply
Old Sep 29, 2006 | 05:50 PM
  #92  
Grumpy666's Avatar
Super Member
 
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 665
Likes: 0
Originally Posted by vrus
We have decided to built the kit as a pair of turbos that will bolt onto the car and KEEP the S/C. Yes.. That's right... 2 x Turbos + Compressor = TONNES OF FUN & GIGGLES!!!
Your goal to build an E55 Transformer is admirable, but I really have to question the wisdom of this decision. I'd have to think about this in more depth, but off the top of my head, I see two issues:

1) You're severely limited in the amount of boost the turbos can be allowed to generate. The turbos won't be feeding a fan like in other blower systems, they'll be feeding an air compressor - one that's already compressing the air to almost twice atmospheric pressure. Feeding that compressor hot, pressurized air will probably overtax an IC that is barely adequate in normal operating conditions.

2) The primary advantage of a turbo is that it consumes considerably less HP than that required to drive a blower that is an air compressor. Feeding that blower pressurized air will actually increase its pumping losses (compressing compressed air), causing it to use even more HP, which will probably offset most of the gains from adding the turbos.

Then there's the fact that the twin screw is a positive displacement blower. Assuming that the issues stated above don't exist, it could potentially become a restriction as you increase turbo flow for more power - w/o spinning it faster, it may limit you. Of course, feeding it pressurized air will help offset this, but I'm not sure if it's a one-for-one trade-off.

Not trying to disuade you, just calling out potential problems I see.

Last edited by Grumpy666; Sep 29, 2006 at 06:00 PM.
Reply
Old Sep 29, 2006 | 05:53 PM
  #93  
medici78's Avatar
MBWorld Fanatic!
 
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 1,764
Likes: 3
From: El Paso, TX
'03 G500, '13 G63, '17 GLS63,
I am still not 100% sold on the idea of keeping the S/C. However, the S/C is not the typical S/C setup. It can be switched off and run N/A. Ask the guys with coolant pump problems
Reply
Old Sep 29, 2006 | 05:56 PM
  #94  
G55K's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Joined: May 2004
Posts: 466
Likes: 32
Originally Posted by Grumpy666
Your goal to build an E55 Transformer is admirable, but I really have to question the wisdom of this decision. I'd have to think about this in more depth, but off the top of my head, I see two issues:

1) You're severely limited in the amount of boost the turbos can be allowed to generate. The turbos won't be feeding a fan like in other blower systems, they'll be feeding an air compressor - one that's already compressing the air to almost twice atmospheric pressure. Feeding that compressor hot, pressurized air will probably overtax an IC that is barely adequate in nornal operating conditions.

2) The primary advantage of a turbo is that it consumes considerably less HP than that required to drive a blower that is an air compressor. Feeding that blower pressurized air will actually increase its pumping losses (compressing compressed air), causing it to use even more HP, which will probably offset most of the gains from adding the turbos.

Then there's the fact that the twin screw is a positive displacement blower. Assuming that the issues stated above don't exist, it could potentially become a restriction as you increase turbo flow for more power - w/o spinning it faster, it may limit you. Of course, feeding it pressurized air will help offset this, but I'm not sure if it's a one-for-one trade-off.

Not trying to disuade you, just calling out potential problems I see.
Everything that you stated above is true. When we'd disengage the supercharger from my Evo we'd gain at least 60awhp. With the displacement of the E55 there is no need for a supercharger as it actually puts you at a disadvantage.
Reply
Old Sep 29, 2006 | 06:03 PM
  #95  
G55K's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Joined: May 2004
Posts: 466
Likes: 32
Originally Posted by medici78
I am still not 100% sold on the idea of keeping the S/C. However, the S/C is not the typical S/C setup. It can be switched off and run N/A. Ask the guys with coolant pump problems
Actually this is a fairly typical S/C system as most of them can be bypassed or disengaged.

The Evo had a bypass valve that was designed to disengage the supercharger as the turbo's made a certain amount of boost. We were making almost 45 psi of boost and, if memory serves me, the supercharger was bypassed at about 20 psi. The bypass design is very tricky.
Reply
Old Sep 29, 2006 | 06:06 PM
  #96  
medici78's Avatar
MBWorld Fanatic!
 
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 1,764
Likes: 3
From: El Paso, TX
'03 G500, '13 G63, '17 GLS63,
Originally Posted by G55K
Actually this is a fairly typical S/C system as most of them can be bypassed or disengaged.

The Evo had a bypass valve that was designed to disengage the supercharger as the turbo's made a certain amount of boost. We were making almost 45 psi of boost and, if memory serves me, the supercharger was bypassed at about 20 psi. The bypass design is very tricky.
Well, I guess I retract my statement. I was under the impression the supercharger could be completely bypassed on these cars.
Reply
Old Sep 29, 2006 | 06:14 PM
  #97  
G55K's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Joined: May 2004
Posts: 466
Likes: 32
Originally Posted by medici78
Well, I guess I retract my statement. I was under the impression the supercharger could be completely bypassed on these cars.

You're correct, it can be bypassed.
Reply
Old Sep 29, 2006 | 06:17 PM
  #98  
MarkoCL65's Avatar
Super Member
 
Joined: Mar 2006
Posts: 514
Likes: 0
From: Chicago
CL65
Originally Posted by G55K
Guys,

You might want to re-think the idea of twincharging (supercharger + turbos). In theory it sounds like a great idea becasue you get the low end torque of a supercharger and the upper end power of a turbo. I've attached some pictures of my Evolution 8. It's a twincharged design and took ever 18 months to build and tune properly. I live in Colorado so I needed the supercharger to help spool this huge turbo. At my altitude this would have been a lag monster.
The system worked well but was high maintainence and big bucks. It's not near as simple as you think. The supercharger has to be bypassed at some point in order for designed power numbers to be reached. Also, be prepared for major heat! The intercooler system in itself was a huge feat of engineering. The supercharger that I used should look familar as it was made by Kleemann's OEM partner. Kleemann actual helped designed some of the components and ideas used for this car but the majority of the work was done by Brandon G.'s buddy Roberto Arano from www.union7.net. Roberto is scary smart when it comes to radical tuning ideas.

In addition, the E55 is already traction limited and has enough displacement to spool large turbos and put down decent low end power without the kompressor. Remove the supercharger and you'll reduce weight, heat, complexity, and you'll hook up better at launch. I'd be willing to bet pinks (j/k) that a well engineered twin turbo E55 would smoke a twincharged (supercharger and twin turbos) E55 at the drag strip and on the street.

Trust me, the engineering on this project to make it work properly is going to be huge. My advice is to bail on the supercharger or call Roberto and be prepared to spend big bucks and lot sof time. Please feel free to ask any questions on my twin charge design and I'll try to answer them.

Good luck!



http://72.41.83.159/images/st-anima-opt.gif
There are major differencs in our proposed kit and your car. Your car uses a supercharger to feed a turbocharger in order to reduce lag, ours, feeds a supercharger with two turbochargers to increase total power output. You may have experienced an increase in IAT's at high boost because at that point it may be likely that the supercharger became a restiction subsequently increasing temperature, not to mention that your compressors have to spin at a higher RPM to make the same boost due to altitude. We should not have that problem for a few reasons. First is that we are already making approximately 400 WHP and our twin screw blower gives our setup the characteristics of a larger displacement NA motor. Our powerband is very much like a 7.0L-7.5L naturally aspirated motor.
We are going to be using two turbos with a rating of about 800 HP each. Why? Twin 63's can produce about 125-150 HP each with less than 5 PSI. Our goal is to keep the boost down and CFM up. We should see a substantial incease in power without seeing an insurmountable amount of heat. This is due to the simple fact that the turbos will barely be working and shouldn't generate any more heat than the blower makes already with a 14 psi pulley. Your 2.0L engine requires more than double the boost that a 5.4L would require to make the same horsepower with the same turbocharger. We need even less boost as we are feeding an engine with 7.0L-7.5L airfow characteristics. Heat should not be an issue. Even if it is, we're developing the SLR style intercooler upgrade anyway. I don't think we'll need it to reach 650 WHP safely, but it wouldn't hurt.

Last edited by MarkoCL65; Sep 29, 2006 at 06:25 PM.
Reply
Old Sep 29, 2006 | 06:26 PM
  #99  
Mad TKD's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Joined: Jun 2005
Posts: 408
Likes: 0
Well I guess time will tell in this development. I personally dont want a SC + TT design.

I also think that taking out the SC will give more space for stuff(IC, bigger throttle bodies etc....)

Good luck
Reply
Old Sep 29, 2006 | 06:36 PM
  #100  
MarkoCL65's Avatar
Super Member
 
Joined: Mar 2006
Posts: 514
Likes: 0
From: Chicago
CL65
Originally Posted by Grumpy666
Your goal to build an E55 Transformer is admirable, but I really have to question the wisdom of this decision. I'd have to think about this in more depth, but off the top of my head, I see two issues:

1) You're severely limited in the amount of boost the turbos can be allowed to generate. The turbos won't be feeding a fan like in other blower systems, they'll be feeding an air compressor - one that's already compressing the air to almost twice atmospheric pressure. Feeding that compressor hot, pressurized air will probably overtax an IC that is barely adequate in normal operating conditions.

2) The primary advantage of a turbo is that it consumes considerably less HP than that required to drive a blower that is an air compressor. Feeding that blower pressurized air will actually increase its pumping losses (compressing compressed air), causing it to use even more HP, which will probably offset most of the gains from adding the turbos.

Then there's the fact that the twin screw is a positive displacement blower. Assuming that the issues stated above don't exist, it could potentially become a restriction as you increase turbo flow for more power - w/o spinning it faster, it may limit you. Of course, feeding it pressurized air will help offset this, but I'm not sure if it's a one-for-one trade-off.

Not trying to disuade you, just calling out potential problems I see.


I'll reply in order using your numbering:
1. The turbos will blow colder than you may think. Remember, there are two of them each being used to less than 1/5th of their potential
2.There will be some resistance exerted by the blower. Given our target boost pressure of 4-5 psi, this will be negligable.

There is a point no doubt at which the blower would choke up the turbos, there has to be given the configuration and the mismatched CFM potential of the components. According to some preliminary calculations and a long talk with an engineer at Garrett, this probably wouldn't take place until about 1000-1200 HP. Keep in mind our compressor wheel speed (both turbos) will be very low.

Last edited by MarkoCL65; Sep 29, 2006 at 06:38 PM.
Reply


You have already rated this thread Rating: Thread Rating: 1 votes, 5.00 average.


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 03:20 PM.

story-0
6 Mercedes Models That Did NOT Age Well (But Are Somehow Still Cool)

Slideshow: Not every Mercedes design becomes timeless, some feel stuck in the era they came from.

By Verdad Gallardo | 2026-05-12 18:09:07


VIEW MORE
story-1
Manual Mercedes? 6 Times Sindelfingen Let Drivers Have All The Fun

Slideshow: Yes, Mercedes built manual cars, and some of them are far more interesting than you'd expect.

By Verdad Gallardo | 2026-05-02 12:36:58


VIEW MORE
story-2
Mercedes SLR McLaren 722 S Is Extremely Rare Example Modified by McLaren

Slideshow: A one-of-one U.S.-spec Mercedes-Benz SLR McLaren Roadster became even rarer after a factory-backed transformation at McLaren's headquarters.

By Verdad Gallardo | 2026-04-29 11:19:28


VIEW MORE
story-3
8 Classic Boxy Mercedes Designs That Have Aged Like Fine Wine

Slideshow: Before curves took over, Mercedes mastered the art of the straight line, and some of those shapes still look right today.

By Verdad Gallardo | 2026-04-25 12:05:49


VIEW MORE
story-4
Flawlessly Restored Mercedes 190E Evo II Heads to Auction

Slideshow: The 190E Evolution II shows how a homologation necessity became a six-figure collector icon.

By Verdad Gallardo | 2026-04-22 17:53:47


VIEW MORE
story-5
Electric Mercedes C-Class Unveiled: 11 Things You Need to Know

Slideshow: Mercedes is turning one of its core nameplates electric, and the details show just how serious this shift is.

By Verdad Gallardo | 2026-04-21 13:58:06


VIEW MORE
story-6
Mercedes EQS Gets A Major Update: Everything You Need to Know

Slideshow: Faster charging, longer range, and a controversial steer-by-wire system define the latest evolution of Mercedes-Benz EQS.

By Verdad Gallardo | 2026-04-15 10:35:34


VIEW MORE
story-7
5 Underrated Mercedes-Benz Models That Don't Get the Love They Deserve

Slideshow: These overlooked Mercedes-Benz models never got the spotlight, but they quietly delivered more than most remember.

By Verdad Gallardo | 2026-04-13 19:35:45


VIEW MORE
story-8
Mercedes 300D Has Pushed Well Past 1 Million Miles and It Ain't Stopping

Slideshow: A well-used 1991 Mercedes-Benz 300D with more than one million miles is now looking for a new owner, and it still appears ready for more.

By Verdad Gallardo | 2026-04-10 10:05:15


VIEW MORE
story-9
10 Most Reliable Mercedes-Benz Models You Can Buy Used

Slideshow: From bulletproof sedans to surprisingly tough SUVs, these Mercedes models proved that the three-pointed star can go the distance.

By Verdad Gallardo | 2026-04-08 09:55:49


VIEW MORE