Hello folks
I wanted to start this thread to brainstorm and document the potential supercharging a 1zz engine with Eaton M24 supercharger at low boost on a stock ECU without remapping. I have a separate thread regarding using low boost and the stock ECU and reference to the Power Enterprise LLC turbo kit at 4psi boost on stock ECU etc.
So premise:
- Eaton M24 supercharger (most likely from VAG group 1.4TSi dual charge engine).
- Modified 2zz 2-piece intake manifold using top half intake plenum.
- remove AC compressor and replace supercharger in location (upside down) on accessory belt. Alternatively require additional belt pulley on crank to drive SC with separate belt similar to VAG setup thus:
[attachment=0:1nf38nr6] ia0 VAG_M24_gears.jpg ia0 [/attachment:1nf38nr6]
- 1 into 2 custom manifold from SC to 2zz intake, simple flanges both ends to suit.
- custom adapter manifold between SC intake & throttle body with appropriate flanges.
- return mod to fuel rail with boost/pressure adjusting fuel rail pressure regulator (similar to Performance Enterprises setup.
- Possibly upgrade fuel pump for better pressure and higher continuous load running, dependent on performance with stock (17yr old) pump.
- position throttle to suit (my vehicle has cold air cone filter to near side vent so positioning is flexible, or to stock intake pipework for alternative applications.
- initial FAB in mild steel for easy welding/forming before considering optimised Aluminium design.
- VAG charger has custom reduction gearing (as shown above) so larger pulley required (ideal for good belt traction and replicate AC pulley in belt routing).
- likely control boost levels by throttling SC rather than relief but fall back will be simple blow-off valve to control max boost.
- keen to experiment with water injection also and allow leaner running with water injection to control combustion temperatures and boost economy/performance.
Further info to be added/discussed. Please note, this is some fun, some experimentation. No ambitions for higher power, just boosted midrange and low rpm driveability.
Please join the conversation with constructive advice/experience. Banter/chit-chat/opinionated arguments or discussions are not welcome please. Let the results speak for themselves, and we may all learn from them.
This is an extract from "http://www.scirocconet.co.uk/forum/supercharger-pulley-for-tsi-t4186.html" as reference only, but has excellent information:
right so let me outline todays findings.
first though, see transcripts for emails sent between myself and a very helpful person at Eaton called Kaid:
________________________________________
Sent: Tuesday, December 15, 2009 7:49 AM
To: Marshall, SuperCharger
Subject: Which supercharger is fitted to...
Hello
I was hoping you could help me with a quick piece of information...
Which model supercharger is fitted to the Volkswagen 1.4 TSI “Twincharger†engine?
Also, could you confirm that the M45 model supercharger is fitted the 1.6 Mini Cooper S?
Thanks,
________________________________________
From: e infosupercharger@eaton.com (mailto:infosupercharger@eaton.com) e
Sent: 15 December 2009 15:34
Subject: RE: Which supercharger is fitted to...
The goal of the â€Twincharged’ engine was to use a supercharger to create boost at low engine RPM while the turbo charger was still trying to reach efficient rpm from exhaust gas. A faster rotating M24 was smaller in size and provided more efficient airflow than a slower rotating M45. The step gears allows the M24 to rotate towards maximum RPM at only 3500 engine RPM. Without the step gears the pulley would be much too small to fit on the shaft and would not have enough area for the belt to contact.
Regards,
Kaid
________________________________________
Sent: Tuesday, December 15, 2009 10:49 AM
To: Marshall, SuperCharger
Subject: RE: Which supercharger is fitted to...
Ah I see. Just a couple more things, sorry to be a pain...
My understanding is that the supercharger connected to the 1.4 TSI cuts out at between 3000-3500rpm via the use of an electromagnetic clutch.
What is the peak boost and maximum RPM of the M24 at 3000-3500rpm? What is the maximum recommended operating speed and boost of the M24 supercharger?
I am trying to find some way of improving the performance of the supercharger on the 1.4TSI and the traditional methods (fitting a smaller pulley and belt to increase supercharger speed and thus boost) to seem to be viable at the moment... any thoughts/ideas?
Cheers,
Patrick
________________________________________
From: e http://www.kennebell.net/techinfo/gener (http://www.kennebell.net/techinfo/gener) m ... atalog.pdf.
2) basically, a twin screw type supercharger would be much better. after going over a few websites, the winner appears to be a charger produced by lysholm, a subsidiary of opcon (see m http://www.opcon.se/index.asp?sPage=1&langID=2&cID=14 (http://www.opcon.se/index.asp?sPage=1&langID=2&cID=14) m for product range). i've not got as far as pinning down which model would best suit the 1.4tsi... i have a feeling it won't be as simple as using the usual manufacturer's recommended approximate engine capacity to charger size charts...
3) doing it on the cheap, a smaller pulley and shorter belt would probably work; albeit it hasn't been developed yet and i'm struggling to find anyone with enough expertise/experience/interest in this type of thing to wanna try it out. also, from my link to kennebell.net above, around 12psi will heat the air to over 250degC... which again is bad. HOWEVER! there is a saving grace! the 1.4tsi comes equipped with a handy dandy intercooler which would help to drop those temperatures significantly, more so if (like me ) you have a Forge front mounted intercooler installed too. also, having read a fair bit, whenver the cooper s' went for a smaller pulley and belt, the spark plugs were recommended to be changed to cooler NGK iridium plugs. this was to detonation or worse... the plugs melting :S. On top of all this, many were recommending water injection and spray bars to further try and cool the charged air. oh by the way, the maximum operating pressure of the M24 is 14.5psi (also known as 1bar)... just imagine the charge air temp and that boost arghhhh!!!
4) if you can spare the money and the heartache, a twin screw supercharger conversion would probably be a better plan. the only problem being that:
a) it is totally unmarked territory
b) the twin screw's are more expensive
c) they have a slightly shorter lifespan and VW sure won't be servicing them...
d) no clue how the electromagnetic 3500rpm cut-off clutch is implemented so again, no idea how you connect the two componants together.
e) boring stuff like engine bay location and mountings have to be addressed. also the supercharger is a b****** to get to as its under and behind the engine (i think...)
f) unsure which model twin screw is suitable.
at least you would recieve the same kind of power delivery as at the moment, as the whole point of the 1.4tsi is that the supercharger gives that direct "hit" of power and torque to get you by as the turbo spools up. this is why a roots supercharger has been used, a centrifugal stlye charger, such as a rotrex, has power delivery which increases with engine rpm, meaning you have bugger all low down the rev range... twin screwsuperchargers also give immediate boost.
final summary, you have two choices if you wanna improve your supercharger:
1. keep roots style eaton m24, get smaller pulley and belt developed, install a front mounted intercooler (and maybe a spray bar), replace spark plugs with cooler iridium type ones, alter vehicle mapping to make use of extra air.
2. replace charger with twin screw style lysholm model, get just about everything involved with adding a supercharger to an engine developed for this application, alter vehicle mapping to make use of extra air.
So this is very interesting reading. See further below...
This is an extract from "http://www.turbominis.co.uk/forums/index.php?p=vt&tid=177956" as reference only, but has key information:
Kompressor:
Modell: EATON M24 Supercharger
weight: 4,8 kg
cc per revolution: 0,390 Liter
max. pressure ratio: 2,0 Bar
Max. RPM 17.000 (18.000)
pumps at highest rpm at 1,8 Bar so about 13psi: 380 m³ / h
Some interesting learning so far:
- Eaton make the M24 without reduction gearbox, not clear in what applications, however the Mini guys seem to use them quite regularly. More research required.
- VAG superchargers are mighty affordable on the dreaded evilbay, and in good condition.
- logic for not using larger M45 SC is to retain the stock ECU and keep within its comfortable margins. Theory still, hence the experimentation.
- Roots blowers are the least efficient charger type, however the smaller higher rpm M24 is a lesser of all evils. See SC efficiency graph below:
[attachment=0:2jxel4a9] ia0 Eaton_M24_efficiency_graph.jpg ia0 [/attachment:2jxel4a9]
- the gearing benefits us in allowing a larger SC pulley and more flexibility for choosing SC speed in working RPM range (<7000rpm).
Can anybody advise please?
- What is stock max rpm?
- what experience/issues with Performance Enterprises turbo kit with stock ECU control please (no piggyback remaps...)?
- what is involved in utilising a 2zz throttle body in place of 1zz with stock 1zz electrics/controls?
If you look at the Eaton website they have a supercharger size calculator. If you use it for a 1.8 litre engine and an M24 supercharger it predicts that the power of the engine will not increase and may actually be reduced, even using 18000 revs for the supercharger. Using the same engine data but choosing an M45 supercharger shows a substantial increase.
This would seem to indicate that the M24 is too small for this application?
Regarding boost limits, it is best to use an appropriately sized charger and drive ratio setting rather than blow off valves etc as these will be very difficult to get working with the MAF as you will be losing intake air out of the system which will totally screw up your AFR with a standard ECU. Also you will know that no OEM supercharger tries to limit boost this way, wastegates are really best for turbos and even then it is exhaust gas that is usually bypassed, not intake air, this option obviously is not possible with a supercharger.
+ 1
The M24 used on the TSI engine doesn't have a reduction gearbox it has the opposite (approximately 1 to 2). This is so the pulley required to drive it isn't huge. Without the gearbox there is no way you would get the required pulley to fit.
The supercharger is also too small to be used on it's own on the 1zz engine, and will only supply 4-6psi to about 4000 rpm at which point it will be beyond it's maximum speed. If you gear it down to reach max engine rpm you won't make boost (probably the opposite)
The M24 is designed for small engines or twincharging.
Sent from my Moto G (5) using Tapatalk
I think the OP just used the wrong term, implying step down gearing instead of step up. The stated intention of keeping the supercharger in its working range at up to 7000 revs (for the engine I assume) suggests the OP realised the gearing was doubling up on the engine speed.
Things have gone quiet though. Shame as it would be good to get another supercharged MR2 going. It's still the best option, but I do think it needs the M45 to work properly.
Edit. I suppose, if the OP is prepared to disconnect the supercharger at about 3500 engine revs and bypass it beyond those revs it would boost power at low revs and you would just live with standard power above that, but that wouldn't really have much if any impact on the outright performance compared to the standard car and it would probably be easier and cheaper just to drive in a lower gear if you really want low speed (mph not revs) response. I reckon if this low end only boost approach was genuinely useful there would be plenty of cars that did it already.
I think what you would have is a halfway house between a turbo diesel and a petrol car but with the worst of both ie you would have the breathless top end power curve of a diesel but without the huge low end torque and high gearing to take advantage of it, but you also wouldn't have any more of the high rev power of a petrol engine to take advantage of the car's low gearing because you would have lost all boost by the mid range, so I would expect it to feel quite frustrating through the rev range. It would probably feel very much like the old non turbo diesel cars of the 80s and early 90s if you ever experienced those?
Could you look at perhaps using a supercharger off the Mk1 MR2 to keep it Toyota?
I am still interested in twincharging (with the output of the supercharger feeding the input of a larger turbo) the same way as the TSI engine works.
The M24 is big enough for that to work, with a clutch to disengage it at 3500rpm when the turbo is fully spooled, the difficult part is controlling the change over without over boosting the engine. The M24 doesn't unfortunately have a built in clutch so that's issue...
The m45 is the smallest Eaton that you would want to fit even then it's probably quite inefficient towards the top end. Both m45 and the MK1 supercharger would require a lot of modification to get them to fit.
No easy solutions unfortunately...
Sent from my Moto G (5) using Tapatalk
Pics of M45 installation.
Looks good. Is it running OK? You seem to have disconnected the air con pump from the belt, any reason why?
That was just a trial fit on an engine destined for my other car. We then built the system up on the existing engine in the blue car (poorly engine) to figure it all out. Right now a rebuilt engine is going in the blue car and the kit is going on that. As to how it's running, I'll tell you when the engine swap is complete. It runs and boosts and the physical installation is all working OK, but the engine was so dodgy it was hard to be really sure when it comes to the tune. Looks like I need a better piggyback ECU than an Emanage Blue. Ideally I want to run yellow 2zz injectors, but that's too rich at low RPM. We're going to try with the standard injectors again, but it will probably be too lean at higher RPM....
I'm not running aircon in the blue car. Handily, the aircon belt is perfect for this job, if you leave out the aircon!
Anyway, I don't want to hijack Tyler's thread, I was just demonstrating that the M45 installation can be done....
Hello all.
Apologies for no involvement, phone smashed on hold last week...
Thanks for valued and ongoing input. I am aware of all observations and considering solutions. Not hell bent on M24 but seems like it suits my needs.
Will discuss more out of work.
Thanks for pics Carolynne, look forward to seeing it run.
cheers
Tyler
I did a bit more research on the Eaton website and I reckon that based on the efficiency maps for the M45 it needs to flow just over 400m3/hr in order to produce 1psi (that's One psi) of boost on a 1.8l engine.
The maximum airflow the M24 can deliver is 380m3/hr and it's way away from it's higher efficiency plateaux at that speed.
As a matter of interest I have just been reading up about the 1.4tsi twin charger engine and my God, if anyone thinks the 1zz is unreliable just thank your lucky stars it isn't made by VW. It really is a sorry tale. I'm not surprised you can easily pick up cheap M24s. Put this together with dieselgate and I really don't think I will ever be buying a VW group car. The more I learn about cars the more I admire the Japanese brands.
yeah I didn't want to say anything as it seemed to be the way forward at the time for the OP and who am I to pee on someones cheerios... but yeah the 1.4 twin charge option in the VAG range was one to be avoided at all costs. Our engines burn enough oil as is thank you very much s:D :D s:D
I don't think there is anything wrong with the supercharger itself, (so it shouldn't affect anyone just using that on another engine), it's just almost everything else about the VW engine!
Irony, this week I traded in my 1.4TSi... unrelated to the thread but I concur fully, never having another non-Jap car again...
Back to topic, still scheming and when I get that darn simulator to work I'll have some feedback on my idea for this charger.
cheers
Tyler
Hello folks
This idea hasn't died, just remained another idea. The idea was to use a sort of reverse CVT drive to speed the SC up at low rpm but then as engine RPM increase, charger rpm stays constant or changes at a lower ratio. That is, unlike a drive train CVT that increases the ratio to speed up the output, the drive ratio to the SC would reduce to keep the SC in rpm limits and effectively reduce boost at higher rpm, but still deliver boost. That is the concept but without time or room to build the setup I'm going to park it until I have my spare engine out of the project car to play with. I will update if/when I have any information.
The M24 needs to run at maximum revs in order to deliver anything close to 137bhp. Even at max revs it will probably restrict maximum power to below 137bhp of the standard car. If you drive it at less than its maximum revs at high engine revs it will restrict power even further so you would have an engine that produced more than the standard 1zz up to about 3.5-4000rpm but with maybe no more than say 90-100bhp maximum power. It would drive very much like a diesel engine but with petrol engine gearing. Not sure that's a good mix.
I agree with the principles, but it is all speculation. It is as much a fun experiment as serious solution for supercharging the 1zz. I have a serious solution on order, will post about that shortly and get ideas from people. Let's let this one lie until I look at it further.
Only if you call the information provided by Eaton's own website "speculation".
Nonetheless I am as keen as ever to see another supercharged MR2 so I very much look forward to a serious solution and genuinely wish you every success with it. I am certainly keen to learn, especially about a project like this.
I thought that the Rotrex was THE way to supercharge the 1ZZ? (albeit at a significant cost!)
Quote from: "shnazzle"http://www.se7enmotorsports.co.uk/supercharger-kits.html
(from another thread (http://mr2roc.org/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?f=7&t=57942&start=690&sid=5b6d38dc6f215727272c37e936b9bec1&sid=5b6d38dc6f215727272c37e936b9bec1#p748450))
It's easiest and best fit.
I wouldn't get a centrifugal supercharger over a turbo to be honest. I'd get s positive displacement SC like the Eaton
Patrick is pointing out proven and known engineering fact. Eaton's figures are to be expected.
As I've pointed out before, and has been known for at least eight decades, a positive displacement supercharger should be of the same displacement as the engine. Stray too far from that and it just does not work.
It's simply about the volume of air being moved. Too little and the engine chokes. Too much and the engine can't shift the volume.