Yea cuz powerstrokes dont drip one bit!
Supercharged 7.3
- Thread starter superpsd
- Start date
Yea cuz powerstrokes dont drip one bit!
SDS97_7.3
Active member
Not like Detroits do. They do 2 things well, drip oil and leak oil
Oh ***k, I have to see that to believe it. Mine was bleeding oil before I replaced all the seals. Ive seen lots of greasy, stained driveways with obs or 99-03 superduties on them.
Do 6l leak oil as readily as 7.3s? I had bad leakage but to be honest it happened after 225k miles on my 00. Plus the leaks coincided with me switching to mobil1 oil.
SDS97_7.3
Active member
Trust me, 7.3's have nothing on a Detroit. But my 97 isn't bad, just a slight drip. Better than others I've seen
2000wa250
Active member
- Joined
- Oct 15, 2011
- Messages
- 1,048
- Reaction score
- 0
Yep tell me how going from a 1.10 housing on my 468 to a .91 housing, and didn't see any egt changes what so ever. Back pressure raised slightly, but only above about 30 psi of boost pressure is back pressure actually more than 1 to 1....
According to you those are all lies....only problem with that is I have physical hard data to back up that statement. Oh and with bigger sticks where you say the "problem" will be worse? Umm.....330/200% big enough for you?
I'm all for trying new ideas, but I also like to respect the laws of.physics given they kind of rule everything....physics says you will get the wanted result with the blower second, while physics ALSO says it will be next to impossible to not have vaccuum pre turbo...
Oh yeah, correct me if I'm wrong, but aren't turbos designed to have air resistance working on the compressor side? In other words, you apply vacuum to the inlet side you can essentially overspin the turbo?
According to you those are all lies....only problem with that is I have physical hard data to back up that statement. Oh and with bigger sticks where you say the "problem" will be worse? Umm.....330/200% big enough for you?
I'm all for trying new ideas, but I also like to respect the laws of.physics given they kind of rule everything....physics says you will get the wanted result with the blower second, while physics ALSO says it will be next to impossible to not have vaccuum pre turbo...
Oh yeah, correct me if I'm wrong, but aren't turbos designed to have air resistance working on the compressor side? In other words, you apply vacuum to the inlet side you can essentially overspin the turbo?
I am well aware of Detroit's. I have a 453T, 453N, and an 8V53N that I may find something to put it in. The blower on those setups are a scavenger blower not used for actuall supercharging. There were three other Cummins setups that used a turbo over Eaton and from the information I gathered it seemed they were battling high intake temps.
The guy who is building the Cummins whipple kits started out building kits with the turbo feeding the blower . He now builds the kits supercharger over turbo with a bypass. I will be leaving the super over turbo as it does make sence as once the blower is unloaded it reduces parasitic drag increasing fuel effeciency. Also I came across some information that an Eaton charger does not like being fed boost above about 15 lbs and not because of the rotor flex but because of the seals. I have along road ahead but I do plan on a whipple, turbo and fuel system improvements down the road.
The guy who is building the Cummins whipple kits started out building kits with the turbo feeding the blower . He now builds the kits supercharger over turbo with a bypass. I will be leaving the super over turbo as it does make sence as once the blower is unloaded it reduces parasitic drag increasing fuel effeciency. Also I came across some information that an Eaton charger does not like being fed boost above about 15 lbs and not because of the rotor flex but because of the seals. I have along road ahead but I do plan on a whipple, turbo and fuel system improvements down the road.
Last edited:
ghohouston
Active member
Yeah, im yet to see a detroit that isnt slobbering oil out of every exhaust port. Macks are pretty bad about it too. They come with a built in turbine oil system lol
SDS97_7.3
Active member
Yeah but when you have a truck that has a Mack, trans, engine, axles, etc... You couldn't build it any beefier.
Last edited:
SDS97_7.3
Active member
But why not try Charles and HRT's idea. Very simple to try. Seems like you are dead set against trying it JW
SSpeeDEMONSS
New member
Why not just let him try his own ideas. He didn't come in asking about what he should do. He said from the beginning what he was going to do. He is doing it. It isn't affecting anybody else. Whether or not he I'd doing it wrong is another question.
Garrett
Garrett
Pwnm30rdi3
Member
Yeah i know. It just sucks that some extremely knowledgeable people take the time to give their 2 cents and it just gets discarded by stubbornness.
Stuborness? No one here has put a positive displacement blower on a 7.3. I took the advice from a guy who actually has placed PD style blowers on a diesels. His advice was the most effecient way was blower over turbo with a bypass and he has ran the setups both ways. He runs a whipple over twins currently.
Charles
Well-known member
- Joined
- May 18, 2011
- Messages
- 2,709
- Reaction score
- 26
If you expect the blower to unload for efficiency reasons then I've got a bit of bad news again..
It will unload the blower when you are requesting the most power, as the turbo lights and tries to suck the pos through the compressor inlet, and worse still, the blower will have the greatest parasitic drag when you are at your lowest desired power while trying to simply drive down the road and get mileage and the pos then will be all excited, trying to ram boost down the turbo's throat when the turbo and engine are trying to do nothing...
100% ass backward.
But none of this was unexpected. I wish you would stop posting now, or maybe someone can take it off my "Replies" list, cause I can't help clicking on the link when it lights up.
Doing what's known to be retarded, proving that it is retarded with hard data and then vowing to spend even more time and effort to push it even farther down the same retarded direction just seems like something you should do in private.
Your buddy with the blowers pre-turbo might not be the best source of info. I bet dynos are kryptonite to that Mofo. It's all pie-in-the-sky feel good bs, when a guy with a drop in replacement charger would probably walk all over his ass down low, up top, mileage, power, everywhere, lol. I've seen it over and over.
No power, worse functionality, worse efficiency...
Typical blower thread, congrats... fall in line with every idiot who already did this before you...
This is your typical cookie-cutter blower project. Physics wins, yet again.
It will unload the blower when you are requesting the most power, as the turbo lights and tries to suck the pos through the compressor inlet, and worse still, the blower will have the greatest parasitic drag when you are at your lowest desired power while trying to simply drive down the road and get mileage and the pos then will be all excited, trying to ram boost down the turbo's throat when the turbo and engine are trying to do nothing...
100% ass backward.
But none of this was unexpected. I wish you would stop posting now, or maybe someone can take it off my "Replies" list, cause I can't help clicking on the link when it lights up.
Doing what's known to be retarded, proving that it is retarded with hard data and then vowing to spend even more time and effort to push it even farther down the same retarded direction just seems like something you should do in private.
Your buddy with the blowers pre-turbo might not be the best source of info. I bet dynos are kryptonite to that Mofo. It's all pie-in-the-sky feel good bs, when a guy with a drop in replacement charger would probably walk all over his ass down low, up top, mileage, power, everywhere, lol. I've seen it over and over.
No power, worse functionality, worse efficiency...
Typical blower thread, congrats... fall in line with every idiot who already did this before you...
This is your typical cookie-cutter blower project. Physics wins, yet again.
Vader's Fury
Active member
That made me LOL
bruce
Active member
:bowfast: ...
psduser1
Active member
Try telling him what you really think, Charles. ....:thumbsup:
Yet you have no real world experience with a positive displacement charger on a diesel in a twin charged configuration. Or am I wrong. First of all like I said I never asked for help all I said front the start is this is what I am building and this is the way I am going about it. Next step is a free floating swing valve. This is what the Cummins kits are using. Crazy Carl uses this type of valve with a whipple over twins and he is making a pound @ idle and 85 psi maximum on a 24V 5.9. He also said once the turbos outpull the blower they pull thru the valve from atmosphere and sees no vaccum at the inlet of the atmospheric turbo. I also found that a few Mercedes diesel guys were using eatons with turbo s. One in paticular fed the blower with turbo and was seeing excessive IATs and reversed the setup to blower feeding the turbo. In fact Volvo has a marine application in which the turbo is fed by the blower with a bypass.
Oh an another benefit I am seeing is improved engine braking a huge plus to me. I will remind you this is a daily driven stick truck not a puller or race truck. It's spends 90 percent of its time in the 1000-2000 range.
You took his advice and it's not working for you. Time to listen to some new advice, and you have several people recommending a specific change. If you don't listen, then yes, you're stubborn.
Last edited:
The way it is driven currently is staying. I may also look at building a pulley system to drive the blower faster. Currently my 2.7:1 ratio pushes 1312.5L of air @ idle and 6450L @ 3500. When I had the larger pulley it was a 2.25:1 driven setup. I picked up 292.5 blower rpm @ idle or 650 rpm. At 3500 rpms it picked up 1575 rpms to a maximum blower speed of 9450 rpm. however the maximum safe speed of the blower in oem form is 14,000 rpms. I would need to spin the blower with a 4:1 ratio which I may go down that road. The other option like I said which will happen either way is a larger Whipple. A larger blower with push more cfm at the same blower ratio. Not to mention more efficiently. Twin screws actually have internal compression a roots does not. Next step will be to install a free floating bypass to allow the turbo to pull from atmosphere when the blower is not pushing enough air. This blower alone has a lot more room to spin it faster for more performance. I may mess with it or just wait to buy a Whipple.
