Here are the pics of the newer version with some modifications.
Roe Supercharger
- Thread starter HV SRT
- Start date
bigike
Full Access Member
Thats not the play HV is talking about.?
That is the plate. But I enlarged the existing slots . I did not drill the 1/4" holes shown in the pic.
When I spoke to Sean about the plates, the design change from 2 plates to one was based on fabrication issues. The stock design is still the same hole pattern. Joe did some modifications to the plates on mine, but we have not yet pushed it to see if we made the power we were after. As of 2 weeks ago Joe was still considering tuning without the plate and balancing each cylinder individually.
All that aside, Don did what I wanted to do. Congrats.
All that aside, Don did what I wanted to do. Congrats.
Thanks Dale I'm sure you well get there to . Then with your nos ??? Good luck and this summer we will have to have a GTG.
How much did you open up the slots? I imagine you used the the center of the existing slots and enlarged them outbound.
pokeytemplar
Full Access Member
pokeytemplar said:
Wow thanks for the pictures. Now I "see" what the problem is. The plate(s) is restricting the flow not the lower intake manifold. Very tricky endeavor to mod those you want more flow however if you go too far then you end up leaning out the front cylinders before the rear. Individual cylinder tuning and 10 o2 sensors would be the only way to safely/radically modify those restrictor plate(s).
bigike
Full Access Member
Thats to balance the engine............
bigike
Full Access Member
So that bolts to the bottom of the bloer instead of the lower plenum?
I'm thinking if you open the slots up proportionately, you will end up with the same air distribution. Hopefully Sean will chime in soon.
bigike
Full Access Member
bigike said:
No el-answer-o?
no thats in the bottom portion of the intake the top part is just a flat plate.bigike said:
As I look closer to my picture I believe the part we are talking about is missing. Note the groves in the back of the manifold...those are the mounting points for the part that directed the flow evenly to the various cylinders.
(Just below the donuts (Matt!)...
I seem to recall some comments about a possible patent action and that plate was still somewhat confidential...maybe I was dreaming that...
(Just below the donuts (Matt!)...
I seem to recall some comments about a possible patent action and that plate was still somewhat confidential...maybe I was dreaming that...
that is basicly the same as the 2 plates but just one piece. Those are the holes I was thinking of doing the same thing to. Now I got yeah. Good to go.Thanks againblackviper said:Here are the pics of the newer version with some modifications.
Correct. I only made them wider. I made them wider by the area of a 1/4" hole.blackviper said:
Prof said:As I look closer to my picture I believe the part we are talking about is missing. Note the groves in the back of the manifold...those are the mounting points for the part that directed the flow evenly to the various cylinders.
(Just below the donuts (Matt!)...
I seem to recall some comments about a possible patent action and that plate was still somewhat confidential...maybe I was dreaming that...
for those confused about whipple v lysholm here is a post I found by whipple.Hope it helps.
I know this topic is a bit old, but thought I would shed some light.
Eaton has not renewed their contract with Lysholm, the Ford GT is the first and only project for the Lysholm/Eaton screw compressor. I can pretty much bet my life on the fact that Eaton will have nothing to do with Lysholm (on a SC project) in the future.
There was 4 companies that made screw compressors, Lysholm, Autorotor, Sprintex and IHI. Sprintex makes very small qty's in australia. IHI is the largest, they make the screw which was based off a SRM design (IHI was a liscenee of SRM) for Mercedes and Mercury Marine. Autorotor purchased Lysholm, but the main Lysholm owners took controling shares and are now chairman of the board, president, etc. Autorotor, as their website states is only for fuel cell technology. Lysholm makes SC's for internal combustion engines.
By April of 2005, Lysholm was some 3000 units behind our orders, a problem that began in mid 2004, reached critical levels by November 2004 and was severly damaging to our company, our company name and reputation. Because there were zero compressors, they were not honoring warranty of any type. We were left for dead with absolutely no plan for the future. After demanding a forecast, a plan, or just some information about the future. We got nothing, no plan, no forecast, nothing. At that point, we had an account balance with them that was current so this was not about money or anything. They did not have product to ship, what product they did have went to Eaton and then Ford, which was a very low qty.
This left us in a bad situation. Needless to say, there is a new supercharger mfg. now, the only one in the USA and thats Whipple Industries. The new SC lineup is 100% Whipple and has nothing to do with Lysholm, Autorotor or any of them. In the new design process, we increased the overall strength, efficiency, noise and appearance. The results have been far better than we could've ever hoped for.
Hope this helps,
Dustin Whipple
Whipple Superchargers
I know this topic is a bit old, but thought I would shed some light.
Eaton has not renewed their contract with Lysholm, the Ford GT is the first and only project for the Lysholm/Eaton screw compressor. I can pretty much bet my life on the fact that Eaton will have nothing to do with Lysholm (on a SC project) in the future.
There was 4 companies that made screw compressors, Lysholm, Autorotor, Sprintex and IHI. Sprintex makes very small qty's in australia. IHI is the largest, they make the screw which was based off a SRM design (IHI was a liscenee of SRM) for Mercedes and Mercury Marine. Autorotor purchased Lysholm, but the main Lysholm owners took controling shares and are now chairman of the board, president, etc. Autorotor, as their website states is only for fuel cell technology. Lysholm makes SC's for internal combustion engines.
By April of 2005, Lysholm was some 3000 units behind our orders, a problem that began in mid 2004, reached critical levels by November 2004 and was severly damaging to our company, our company name and reputation. Because there were zero compressors, they were not honoring warranty of any type. We were left for dead with absolutely no plan for the future. After demanding a forecast, a plan, or just some information about the future. We got nothing, no plan, no forecast, nothing. At that point, we had an account balance with them that was current so this was not about money or anything. They did not have product to ship, what product they did have went to Eaton and then Ford, which was a very low qty.
This left us in a bad situation. Needless to say, there is a new supercharger mfg. now, the only one in the USA and thats Whipple Industries. The new SC lineup is 100% Whipple and has nothing to do with Lysholm, Autorotor or any of them. In the new design process, we increased the overall strength, efficiency, noise and appearance. The results have been far better than we could've ever hoped for.
Hope this helps,
Dustin Whipple
Whipple Superchargers
pokeytemplar
Full Access Member
I believe his patent went through. I saw his patent somewhere in this big ol internet thing. The intake is fine within the space constraints he had to work with. The restrictor plates is what needs a little tweaking for the High HP Roe customs.
For what it is worth there is a company that makes a 2" tall air/water intercooler core that is long enough to fit the length of the lower intake plenum area. IF the fin count is dense enough it would provide the necessary restriction to help even the flow to all 10 cylinders or at least allow further porting of the restrictor plates.
For what it is worth there is a company that makes a 2" tall air/water intercooler core that is long enough to fit the length of the lower intake plenum area. IF the fin count is dense enough it would provide the necessary restriction to help even the flow to all 10 cylinders or at least allow further porting of the restrictor plates.
Just for clarification, you had the slots widened by a 1/4 inch total or by a 1/4 inch in each direction for a total of 1/2 an inch?
blackviper said:
Only Don can say for sure, but I interpreted his statement to mean he widened the slot just barely, so that the total area was increased by the same amount as drilling the hole.
So he added 3.14 X (1/8 X 1/8) = .049 sq in to the existing slot for every hole that he would have drilled.
But I may be wrong.
Support Us
Become A Supporting Member Today!
