Thread: Max. rpm Sc
View Single Post
Old Mar 8, 2008 | 10:17 AM
  #14 (permalink)  
BrianBrave's Avatar
BrianBrave
<--- Huge Horsepower
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 3,217
Likes: 2
From: So Cal
Default Re: Max.rpm Sc

Originally Posted by ShawnQ
The MAX our superchargers can handle is 20,700rpm.
With the stock crank pulley, we run around 14,500 rpm.
With the 185mm pulley, we run around 18,700 rpm.

You do the math.

SQ
By my calculations: (based on the stock 74mm S/C Pulley)

Stock Crank Pulley : 74mm S/C - - Ratio = 2.0270
Engine RPM @ 6,000 - - S/C RPM = 12,405
Engine RPM @ 6,200 - - S/C RPM = 12,819 - Rev Limiter W/Tune
Engine RPM @ 7,000 - - S/C RPM = 14,473

178mm Crank Pulley : 74mm S/C - - Ratio = 2.4054
Engine RPM @ 6,000 - - S/C RPM = 14,432
Engine RPM @ 6,200 - - S/C RPM = 14,914 - Rev Limiter W/Tune
Engine RPM @ 7,000 - - S/C RPM = 16,838

181mm Crank Pulley : 74mm S/C - - Ratio = 2.4459
Engine RPM @ 6,000 - - S/C RPM = 14,676
Engine RPM @ 6,200 - - S/C RPM = 15,165 - Rev Limiter W/Tune
Engine RPM @ 7,000 - - S/C RPM = 17,122

185 Crank Pulley : 74mm S/C - - Ratio = 2.5000
Engine RPM @ 6,000 - - S/C RPM = 15,000
Engine RPM @ 6,200 - - S/C RPM = 15,500 - Rev Limiter W/Tune
Engine RPM @ 7,000 - - S/C RPM = 17,500

Using a Stock Crank Pulley, the S/C pulley would need to be reduced to:

63.6mm to equal the boost of 178mm Crank Pulley running @ 6,200 Engine RPM
62.5mm to equal the boost of 181mm Crank Pulley running @ 6,200 Engine RPM
61.2mm to equal the boost of 185mm Crank Pulley running @ 6,200 Engine RPM

If 20,700 is the max S/C RPM; and to be safe we decide to stay 10% under max - that's a target of 18,630 S/C RPM - - (when at 6,200 engine RPM)

Stock Crank Pulley would need a 50.9mm S/C Pulley
178mm Crank Pulley would need a 59.2mm S/C Pulley
181mm Crank Pulley would need a 60.2mm S/C Pulley
185mm Crank Pulley would need a 61.6mm S/C Pulley

Check my numbers to see if I missed something.... because I want to replace my 74mm S/C pulley with a 61.6mm S/C pulley (16.78% smaller)
 

Last edited by BrianBrave; Mar 8, 2008 at 10:31 AM.
Reply