For those considering a s/c, here are some thoughts

Reply Subscribe

Thread Tools

Search this Thread

Nov 17, 2005 | 08:47 PM

#21

midiwall

Registered User

Joined: Dec 2002

Posts: 9,048

Likes: 2

From: Seattleish, WA

Quote:

Originally Posted by ebelen1

You don't have to put in a smaller pulley but for $137, why not?

Whoa... hang on a minute.

The 2.2" pulley ("one step" smaller) is probably the SMALLEST I would go without running one more thing... a misting system. The reason being is that as you've heard, Christian (96 runner) has had to retard his timing a BUNCH to get rid of ping - I'm even more "retarded" (

) with my 2.2" pulley.

If you go to a 2.1" or a 2.0" pulley then you will burn the crap out of the motor unless you find someway to slow down the burn of the fuel. That means a higher octane number or retarding the timing even more. A misting system does well to create the burn equivilant of a higher octane, thus giving you a slower burn, thus reducing the ping.

And in reality... With my 1-step colder plugs, a spark kicker and -10's and -11's in my ignition map, I still ping under load with the 2.2" pulley. I can "drive around it", but it's not safe.

Quote:

Originally Posted by hondavxr

Turbo produces more hp because it is intercooled air. Colder, more dense air equals more hp, with less psi.

Ahh right. I knew that.

Thank you!

Nov 18, 2005 | 04:49 AM

#22

Contributing Member

Joined: Nov 2005

Posts: 8,875

Likes: 3

From: Longmont, CO

Quote:

Originally Posted by hondavxr

Turbo produces more hp because it is intercooled air. Colder, more dense air equals more hp, with less psi. It is a problem to trying to intercool a s/c because you must cool the pressurized air, pressurized air on MOST s/c is located right after the throttle body. Its hard to try to intercool at that section because by the time you reroute everything thing you would have lost pressure and horses. Many companies have tried esp, with Hondas but the cost exceeds the benefits. Some intercooler kits ran up towards the 3000, just for the s/c intercooler kit. Turbo is a good route because it uses waste energy, the exhaust air, to pressurize the air. Turbo has no paradrastic drag on the motor like s/c. With the turbo technology these days, you could get pretty instant turbo response from a big snail, without the lag. Well, turbo does not usually have the instant torque that s/c has. I hope this kit will be mass market so the cost will go down. I have been waiting for a affordable priced turbo kit for the 3.4 motor, for a long while now.

Huh? The ONLY difference in a supercharger and a turbocharger (which is technically named a turbosupercharger) is the way they are driven. You are cooling pressurized air on a turbo also - it is the compression itself that creates the heat! Intercooling does indeed have the effect you talk about (denser oxygen charge), but there is NO difference in intercooling a supercharger and a turbocharger. Well, other than the plumbing involved as you mention. It is truly impossible to intercool a supercharger built straight onto the intake, but it would be impossible to intercool a turbo mounted the same way. As a matter of fact, Seadoo even makes a jetski that has an intercooled supercharger (making 215 HP!). I have not seen the TRD s/c kit, so I'm not sure where it's mounted, and whether the proposed turbo is intercooled or not.

The advantage to turbo is less polar inertia (lighter rotor) and no parasitic drag.

Nov 18, 2005 | 05:08 AM

#23

midiwall

Registered User

Joined: Dec 2002

Posts: 9,048

Likes: 2

From: Seattleish, WA

Quote:

Originally Posted by tc

I have not seen the TRD s/c kit, so I'm not sure where it's mounted, and whether the proposed turbo is intercooled or not.

It's mounted such that it becomes the intake manifold. You pull the stock intake manifold & plenum and bolt the S/C right on top of the block. There's no chance for an intercooler.

Nov 18, 2005 | 05:35 AM

#24

Contributing Member

Joined: Nov 2005

Posts: 8,875

Likes: 3

From: Longmont, CO

That would indeed make intercooling difficult! Water injection...propane...nitrous....LOL

Nov 18, 2005 | 06:05 AM

#25

ebelen1

Thread Starter

Contributing Member

Joined: Jul 2005

Posts: 1,963

Likes: 0

From: Socal

Quote:

Originally Posted by midiwall

Thank you!

Exactly. The smaller the pulley, the greater the heat. This is the smallest pulley (according to URD) that can be run w/o a misting system. Again, these statements are only for those that believe that you do everything to have the truck run well and for a long period of time. You can do anything you want; run smaller pulleys, don't do fuel mods, don't tune the sucker; but as Christian stated above, you're gambling. Wasn't willing to do this w/ a DD.

Nov 18, 2005 | 06:23 AM

#26

Buck01

Registered User

Joined: Apr 2005

Posts: 595

Likes: 0

From: Ohio

Ok am I missing something here?????????

From what I see of the estimated costs here for adding a SC.
Couldn't you buy a whole motor from LC engineering with a SC or a Turbo and come
in under the estimated prices?

Then sell your old motor and cut the costs even further.

This seems way to obvious. Let me know what I am missing.

Thanks

Nov 18, 2005 | 06:46 AM

#27

ebelen1

Thread Starter

Contributing Member

Joined: Jul 2005

Posts: 1,963

Likes: 0

From: Socal

Quote:

Originally Posted by Buck01

Not missing anything. I have a V6 and most of my understanding of LCE is that they work w/ 4-bangers. Just not willing to do a motor swap on my DD. Not to mention that the S/C guys can get over 300 to the wheels w/ a bolt-on type of setup.

Nov 18, 2005 | 06:58 AM

#28

Buck01

Registered User

Joined: Apr 2005

Posts: 595

Likes: 0

From: Ohio

lol it was the V6 part I was missing. I have the 22re and I ASSUMED...everyone else did too.

I really gotta start reading things more carefully.

Thanks for pointing out the obvious. : )

Jan 25, 2006 | 05:03 AM

#29

MTL_4runner

Contributing Member

Joined: Jul 2003

Posts: 8,807

Likes: 3

From: Montreal, QC Canada

Quote:

Originally Posted by Noliwan

Yeah go to this thread on CT...

http://www.customtacos.com/ubbthread...&o=186&fpart=1

I've seen this baby in person up close-- Guy lives pretty close to me & Dave (TRDOLMAN) All I can say is WOW....!!! very impressive...

I read that whole thread and they are making references to pics but no links anywhere. (it was also funny to read how one guy thought using an aquamist system split the H2O into oxygen and hydrogen to let you burn more fuel.....um, no, that is called electrolysis).

Does anyone have any links to pics for Gadget's new turbo setup?

Is this it?

Look at the injector rail setup on the far right (attached to the intake runners!)
.....water injection?

Last edited by MTL_4runner; Jan 25, 2006 at 05:21 AM.

Jan 25, 2006 | 05:59 AM

#30

JHupp

Registered User

Joined: Oct 2005

Posts: 1,166

Likes: 0

From: New Jersey

I know it is kind of off topic, but I was wondering how much it would be if I needed to purchase gaskets and all of the hardware that came with a supercharger. The only thing I would have is the supercharger itself, no belts or bolts. Any estimate would be very helpful, I may be able to score one cheap without the hardware and such. Thanks,
Jason

Jan 25, 2006 | 06:02 AM

#31

FilthyRich

Contributing Member

Joined: Jun 2004

Posts: 4,218

Likes: 0

From: Richmond, Va

Quote:

Originally Posted by JHupp

call evan at northridge toyota.
Shouldn't be that bad at all

Jan 25, 2006 | 06:13 AM

#32

JHupp

Registered User

Joined: Oct 2005

Posts: 1,166

Likes: 0

From: New Jersey

hmmmm, I'll try that this afternoon, Thanks,
Jason

Jan 25, 2006 | 06:38 AM

#33

MTL_4runner

Contributing Member

Joined: Jul 2003

Posts: 8,807

Likes: 3

From: Montreal, QC Canada

Quote:

Originally Posted by JHupp

There have been a few threads on the other parts already for you:
https://www.yotatech.com/forums/f2/oh-no-not-another-s-c-question-52998/

If the S/C is used you might want to look into rebuilding it too:
https://www.yotatech.com/forums/f2/heres-nose-drive-bearing-part-numbers-1st-gen-s-c-31363/

Last edited by MTL_4runner; Jan 25, 2006 at 06:39 AM.

Jan 25, 2006 | 11:01 AM

#34

TRDOLMAN

Registered User

Joined: Dec 2004

Posts: 270

Likes: 0

From: Fremont, CA

Quote:

Originally Posted by MTL_4runner

Look at the injector rail setup on the far right (attached to the intake runners!)
.....water injection?

Jamie---that IS Gadget's turbo setup. That injector rail has 6 additional fuel injectors mounted in it controlled by a special URD additional injector controller. The setup uses the stock injectors in the engine and the stock ECU so off boost/closed loop is basically stock with no tuning issues. I rode in it. It absolutely hauls ass.

Jan 25, 2006 | 01:05 PM

#35

DavidA

Contributing Member

Joined: Apr 2004

Posts: 921

Likes: 0

From: Fort Worth, TX

"drool"

Jan 25, 2006 | 02:38 PM

#36

MTL_4runner

Contributing Member

Joined: Jul 2003

Posts: 8,807

Likes: 3

From: Montreal, QC Canada

Quote:

Originally Posted by TRDOLMAN

Thanks for clearing that up Dave!
The more I see of turbo setups for the 3.4L, the more I am thinking that is how I will go on mine.
They aren't quite as "bolt on" as a S/C but the tuning capability is just amazing.

Jan 26, 2006 | 02:32 AM

#37

TomCham

Registered User

Joined: Dec 2005

Posts: 24

Likes: 0

From: Hong Kong

Hello everyone, This is Tom Cham from Hong Kong. I am new here & have just fitted the TRD s/c'r to my Toyota Prado It seems that most of the gas station in USA supply Octane 90 or 93 fuel. We use Octance 98 fuel in Hong Kong only. I am going to order a 2.2" s/c'r pulley & fuel upgrade kit from URD. Anyone here tried Octance 98 fuel in USA with 2.2" pulley & no fuel upgrade mod?

It was much more enjoyable to drive my Prado (very similar to 4Runner) with s/c'r and I would love to get a bit more

Any recommendation will be greatly appreciated.

Jan 26, 2006 | 05:31 AM

#38

rimpainter.com

Contributing Member

Joined: Jan 2003

Posts: 10,916

Likes: 1

Hi Tom -

The stock fuel pump needs to be upgraded no matter what. It is simply not up to the task of the increased fuel demands at sustained boost - especially if you plan on going to the 2.2 pulley. Furthermore, the timing problem (too much advancement in the stock map) between 2K and 3K (HG/LR) is not "solved" with fuel that can burn longer. Sure, pre-detonation will be reduced with 98, but you still need to install something that will take control of the timing, such as the SMT or FTC.

I wouldn't even drive the vehicle without the Walbro 190 - even with 98 octane fuel.