Anyone know what the max boost is on this blower before it starts to over spin?

 

it's a 142.., i think it's 12 or 14000rpm max




what yea thinkin

 

I just spoke with the blower guy at Holley (aka Weiand ) today, and he was telling me that the 144 and 170 are no more than an inch apart in case size. Hopefully I'll have one in my hands soon, as I think I'm trying the same thing you are

Hopefully will have some pics to post in the near future.. Or maybe it wont work.. Either way I'm gonna try...

Dave C.

 

You guys really should read the recent "Battle of the Boost" thread. It proves how in-efficient the 174 blower is. The 140/142/144 are much less efficient than that even.

That being said, I ran a 144 on a 355 with TFS heads and a ZZ3 cam (208/221 - 112 .474"/.510" lift) in an '89 Firebird. Its best time was 12.10 at 114 mph at 5 psi boost. Although it seemed fast at the time (5 years ago), my current car ran the same number naturally aspirated with a similar cam, smaller heads, and more compression.

At one point, I tried using the smallest pulley they sell for those (2.5" I think) and the boost rose to 7 psi. Performance? Stayed the same. I measured the intake air temp at 200+ degrees with 40 degree ambient air. I calculated the adiabatic efficiency at the time to be a horrible 38%, versus 70+% for most modern centrifugals.

If you're going to pursue such an endeavor, I'd recommend using a screw-type compressor (I think the Kenne Bell blowers are screw). The efficiencies on these are much closer to centrifugals. This is why some people are picking up as much as 100 rwhp with new Ford Lightnings by switching from a lobe blower to a screw.

Mike

 

You guys are driveing me up the wall To the best of my knowledge, there aint no 140 or 170 weiand blowers. There is'nt a 174 for the sbc. There is a 142,144 and 177 miny blowers for sbc. Do i know everything... . Check here for sizes and aplications...

http://www.holley.com/HiOctn/ProdLin...ro-Street.html

engineermike, i'm surprised you didn't run faster with that combo. I ran 12.3Xs@113.60 on radial T/As with a 9 to 1 355, tfs heads, xe268cam (224/230 - 110 509/512 lift 1.6rr) rpm intake, full exhaust, stock converter, 3.5 gears ...N/A

CCCCCYA, the 177 is about 2" taller then the 142...here's specks

http://www.holley.com/HiOctn/TechSer...o/SCTech3.html

Whipplle makes a carb system that'll support about 700hp and has better efficiency then centrifugal sc's.

http://www.whipplesuperchargers.com/...sp?ProdID=1171

They should have tested a whipple or KB on that 327 ( i think)sbf too.

For less then the cost of a centrifugal package you could use a small blower and a small nitrous system and make more power and have ezer tunenability over a blower through setup.

Some people are using the little blowers here...

http://www.thirdgen.org/techbb2/foru...?s=&forumid=15

BUT each to there own

 

That was my point, exactly. Looking back, I'm also surprised it didn't run better. I always attributed that to the very poor efficiency of the 144.

Back in 1998, low 12's at 114 seemed pretty impressive for a street car. Now, every LS1 with headers and a high-stall torque converter runs that.

Once upon a time, I calculated the maximum cfm a 144 would flow at max compressor speed. I figured out that it would flow just enough air (but not produce boost) to supply a 570 hp motor. In other words, the more power your motor makes NA, the less a 144 will help it, until you reach 570 hp NA, when adding a 144 will neither gain or lose power.

I figured my motor, then, made about 360 fwhp NA. With a 5 psi 144, it made about 440 fwhp.

Mike

 

Not trying to freak anyone out or anything, but MY point with it isn't really to make max HP. I fully understand that a whipple will make more power, and so will a centrifugal, AND so will nitrous. Not what I'm after though . The whipples cost a small fortune, and everyone and his brother has nitrous. A turbo would be very cool, but unless someone can come up with a setup where I don't have to tear half the kit out to change the plugs, then I would much rather do something with a roots type compressor and be a little "different" than everything else out there...

Just a choice. The only person I have to impress is me..

Dave C.

 

I guess my point is that you can achieve your goals naturally aspirated. If you can pull 120 mph in the quarter and make 440 rwhp with a naturally aspirated, reliable, pump gas, hydraulic cam LT1 (and I know you can), then you don't need a roots blower. I sincerely doubt you could reach these power levels with a 142/144 blower.

The blower will be difficult to install, make the car harder to work on, and cause a risk of detonation. Whereas, a well thought-out naturally aspirated set-up will not.

But. . . If you're wanting to do something just for the "WOW" factor, then rage on. If I saw an LT1 with a roots blower at the track, I'd surely stop in amusement for a while.

Mike

 

i agree

 

i know what you mean :blah: