The 2H/12H-T/1HZ/1HD-T/1HD-FT Gturbo Alternative Tech Thread (5 Viewers)

[mudgudgeon]

Plenty of aussie land cruisers got supercharged back in the day.

Sprintex was a well known manufacturer.

Google is your friend. There's discussion about it here too.

Post up a build thread if you go ahead.

 

[northumbrian]

Found plenty of stuff, lots of food for thought.
Will certainly post a build thread for it.

Although It will be separate to my HJ60 build.

 

[mudgudgeon]

Probably should start another thread.

You need to keep in mind a diesel engine's requirements are different to a petrol/gas engine.

 

[northumbrian]

Yeah a lot to think about, but it'll be fun

 

[Dougal]

I have thoroughly enjoyed this thread, and I am impressed by the knowledge and efforts by those whom have posted.

I would like to add another worm to the can

Has anyone considered a supercharger option?

I have a 2H engine, and I don't like turbos, anything that interferes with the exhaust flow is a bad idea in my opinion, but that's just me.
It would be a fairly simple option to fit a supercharger in the space under the alternator, where the A/C pump would go.

Any thoughts?

Superchargers on diesels are a complete waste of time. Compared to a petrol engine they need to pump ~50% more air so draw 50% more power for the same displacement. They generate poor density ratios as they don't have evaporating petrol to cool the intake charge and taking all that power from the crank greatly reduces available power and torque.

Plus the air supply of a supercharger does not scale itself to load. So if you want 2000rpm no load your supercharger is taking the same torque and power from the crank as 2000rpm full load.

Which is why no engine makers use them on diesels.

Yes I have done the calcs. The results are appalling.

 

[serenity]

Listen to this guy.^

He knows more than me...

 

[mudgudgeon]

That was the main thing that swayed me. A Turbo produces boost on demand. supercharger is boosting all the time, plus they aren't efficient across the required rev range. They become a heat pump.

With a turbo, more throttle = more fuel in = more heat energy out = more energy driving the turbo = more boost & more power.
All largely controlled by throttle position.
No throttle = no forced induction creating a load on the crank and pulleys etc.

 

[absalom]

I have thoroughly enjoyed this thread, and I am impressed by the knowledge and efforts by those whom have posted.

I would like to add another worm to the can

Has anyone considered a supercharger option?

I have a 2H engine, and I don't like turbos, anything that interferes with the exhaust flow is a bad idea in my opinion, but that's just me.
It would be a fairly simple option to fit a supercharger in the space under the alternator, where the A/C pump would go.

Any thoughts?

You don't like turbos? My heart, it weeps for you How can you not like the coolest addition to the automotive industry since the wheel?

 

[mudgudgeon]

In that case, they already make 11 blade gen 3 turbines for TD06H. They'd just need to machine the blades down and rebalance to make a TD05H version.

Is this a viable option? Can your garden variety turbo rebuilder/shop do this?

 

[Dougal]

Is this a viable option? Can your garden variety turbo rebuilder/shop do this?

To get good efficiency they need to turn the exact shape into the turbine blades. A man in a shed would struggle, but you'd expect any big turbo shop to be able to handle it.
There's nothing stopping Kinugawa/Mamba/Sumulaya grom making/ordering a batch.

 

[northumbrian]

OK, first things first.
Dougal, I have read your posts, regarding turbo-superchargers vs mechanical superchargers. And I completely agree with you.
This is not why I'm doing it this way. The project I have decided to do is try both, do a real world comparison and post the results here for everyone to see.
90% of the posts for mechanically driven superchargers, have never been backed up with real data, which you have provided for turbo-superchargers.
I do not doubt your numbers Dougal, however I do think a direct one on one comparison with the same set up that you use to evaluate your turbo setups, would be of educational value to this forum.
It also might go so far as to settle the arguement once and for all.

Once I am done, most likely remove them and go back to NA.

Secondly
Making a turbo.
Manufacturing a centrifugal blisk from billet, you need a 5 axis CNC machine, which can be bought for around 50-100k.
Which is within reach of some larger machine shops, however used machines can be acquired for less.
A tri-lobe roots blower can be made on a manual mill, with a rotary table, which can be bought for a few hundred bucks.
This aspect is what made me think of a mechanically driven supercharger in the first place, it's because they can be produced on manual machinery that I have to hand.

Thirdly,
Why I don't like supercharging an engine, if it works and does the job you need, why stress it any more than needed.
After my move from France to Portugal, it'll be used around the land and up the hills, going slowly mostly in low box.
With that in mind I don't really need a forced induction system.

Forthly,
This site is huge, and I am new to it, as well as land cruisers, so forgive my lack of forum navigational skill, I will learn.
I can be somewhat mischievous, and play devils advocate quite a lot.
My posing of mechanical supercharger, was out of ignorance to actually how huge Land cruisers are, and how much has actually been done.
In the past day I have learnt more about that aspect of Land cruisers, thank you to all whom have shown patience in that regard.

Lastly
My experience, 25 years of mechanical engineering, however, automotive is a very recent venture, just never learnt it.
But fancy trying my hand just for fun. So there are going to be gaps in my knowledge, which will cause me to ask "stupid" questions.
I have worked with turbo machinery, both centrifugal & axial turbopumps, for both cryogenic & none cryogenic fuels, in probably one of the most BS driven industries on and off the planet.
Although I much prefer designing and making thrust chambers & nozzles, much more fun

I am currently, moving location in an attempt to regain whats left of my sanity, and concentrate on just pay the bills, and go surfing.
Not much surfing in Central France, hence the move to Portugal.

 

[northumbrian]

Oh and before anyone mentions it, I did not design turbomachinery, just had to get involved with it on the last project I worked on.
You've got to be a very special kind of nerd to do that job.

 

[Dougal]

OK, first things first.
Dougal, I have read your posts, regarding turbo-superchargers vs mechanical superchargers. And I completely agree with you.
This is not why I'm doing it this way. The project I have decided to do is try both, do a real world comparison and post the results here for everyone to see.
90% of the posts for mechanically driven superchargers, have never been backed up with real data, which you have provided for turbo-superchargers.
I do not doubt your numbers Dougal, however I do think a direct one on one comparison with the same set up that you use to evaluate your turbo setups, would be of educational value to this forum.
It also might go so far as to settle the arguement once and for all.

Once I am done, most likely remove them and go back to NA.

Secondly
Making a turbo.
Manufacturing a centrifugal blisk from billet, you need a 5 axis CNC machine, which can be bought for around 50-100k.
Which is within reach of some larger machine shops, however used machines can be acquired for less.
A tri-lobe roots blower can be made on a manual mill, with a rotary table, which can be bought for a few hundred bucks.
This aspect is what made me think of a mechanically driven supercharger in the first place, it's because they can be produced on manual machinery that I have to hand.

Thirdly,
Why I don't like supercharging an engine, if it works and does the job you need, why stress it any more than needed.
After my move from France to Portugal, it'll be used around the land and up the hills, going slowly mostly in low box.
With that in mind I don't really need a forced induction system.

Forthly,
This site is huge, and I am new to it, as well as land cruisers, so forgive my lack of forum navigational skill, I will learn.
I can be somewhat mischievous, and play devils advocate quite a lot.
My posing of mechanical supercharger, was out of ignorance to actually how huge Land cruisers are, and how much has actually been done.
In the past day I have learnt more about that aspect of Land cruisers, thank you to all whom have shown patience in that regard.

Lastly
My experience, 25 years of mechanical engineering, however, automotive is a very recent venture, just never learnt it.
But fancy trying my hand just for fun. So there are going to be gaps in my knowledge, which will cause me to ask "stupid" questions.
I have worked with turbo machinery, both centrifugal & axial turbopumps, for both cryogenic & none cryogenic fuels, in probably one of the most BS driven industries on and off the planet.
Although I much prefer designing and making thrust chambers & nozzles, much more fun

I am currently, moving location in an attempt to regain whats left of my sanity, and concentrate on just pay the bills, and go surfing.
Not much surfing in Central France, hence the move to Portugal.

I can admire your intentions, but to machine a supercharger on a manual mill you'd have to be beyond awesome as a machinist. The time and materials would cost more than buying any used supercharger and I think the clearances and geometry would be severely compromised.

Many people have supercharged diesels, but all those I know of have given up. We had an aussie on here a few years back who supercharged a 2LT and was claiming awesomeness. But it appears he was comparing to a completely shagged turbo and his version of awesome was very different to mine. The rest of the posts (I'm on many diesel forums) come down to someone claiming "it'll be awesome, you'll see, I'll prove you all wrong" and we never hear from them again.

The reason for the lack of real data is no-one gets them working well enough to collect any. I've heard more than once "yeah it's running, just need to tune it to get more power".
The problem is the engine is trying it's hardest already, the power is all being sucked up driving that supercharger.

Oh and before anyone mentions it, I did not design turbomachinery, just had to get involved with it on the last project I worked on.
You've got to be a very special kind of nerd to do that job.

I have designed turbomachinery for water. Water is easy as it doesn't compress. Turbocompressors are more difficult and turbines are truely mind-bending.

Here is a write-up I did for the Landrover 300tdi 2.5 diesel. One guy was asking about supercharging it:

To put turbo and SC charger power into perspective:
A stock 300tdi turbo requires ~14kw shaft power for the engine to produce it's 82kw. This results in about a 12kw pumping loss.
A supercharger (lower efficiency compressor) to produce the same boost and flow would suck around 18kw directly from the crank. You are 6kw worse off.

A better turbo (TD5 GT2052 for example) would have a pumping loss of only 6kw. Leaving you ~6kw better than the original turbo and ~12kw better than the SC.

But that's only at 4000rpm max power.

Consider 2000rpm max torque. Putting out ~12psi boost for ~6kw shaft power.
The stock turbo is producing more boost than back pressure. It only takes 3.4kw from the engine to produce 6kw of shaft power.
A SC would require around 7kw of shaft power and take this directly from the engine. You would be 9.6kw worse off at 2000rpm with a supercharger. Quite a problem when it only produces 55kw at 2000rpm.

Then if you want to cruise at 2000rpm the turbo scales right down to only meet demand. But the supercharger can't.
Your supercharger continues to whine away taking the same 7kw of shaft power and slaughtering your fuel economy.

Which is why there are exactly zero manufacturers making supercharged road diesels.
High fuel consumption.
Low power and torque.
High noise.
Can't scale the output to match the demand.

 

[Ky1e]

Rebuilt my 1hd ct26 last week with the intention of doing the 7m supra mod to it..

Will I need to have it balanced or are these wheels balanced individually?

 

[absalom]

The biggest con to a supercharger is the main reason I'll never own one again (or a naturally aspirated vehicle) --- power loss at altitude. Turbos, despite an increased lag, negate the power losses experienced at elevation. That is the biggest feather in the turbocharger's cap. I hate the idea of losing power, just because I'm driving up a mountain. I'd rather have a smaller, less powerful turbocharged motor with consistent power at various elevations than a more powerful supercharged motor and succumb to a 3% loss every 1k feet.

 

[serenity]

Rebuilt my 1hd ct26 last week with the intention of doing the 7m supra mod to it..

Will I need to have it balanced or are these wheels balanced individually?

The wheels are balanced individually but you will still need to have the whole assembly balanced as well.

 

[Dougal]

The wheels are balanced individually but you will still need to have the whole assembly balanced as well.

That said. I've got away without balancing many times. I've only had one turbo that came out noisey and I was going to balance it. But then I decided to change to a different turbo family.

Final balancing is just taking care of residual imbalance (the sum of the assembly imbalance). Sometimes it is bad enough that you need to balance, other times it'll come out great by chance. If you have a balanced assembly then mark the nut, shaft and wheel so you can reassemble them with the same alignment. This preserves final balance.

 

[northumbrian]

I can admire your intentions, but to machine a supercharger on a manual mill you'd have to be beyond awesome as a machinist. The time and materials would cost more than buying any used supercharger and I think the clearances and geometry would be severely compromised.

Many people have supercharged diesels, but all those I know of have given up. We had an aussie on here a few years back who supercharged a 2LT and was claiming awesomeness. But it appears he was comparing to a completely shagged turbo and his version of awesome was very different to mine. The rest of the posts (I'm on many diesel forums) come down to someone claiming "it'll be awesome, you'll see, I'll prove you all wrong" and we never hear from them again.

The reason for the lack of real data is no-one gets them working well enough to collect any. I've heard more than once "yeah it's running, just need to tune it to get more power".
The problem is the engine is trying it's hardest already, the power is all being sucked up driving that supercharger.

The other problem I see here, is you...
When I say you, it's the fact you are the main one telling everyone, and I think with some people it is an issue they seem to have with you.
Sort of like a personal challenge to prove you wrong, because you are so clearly just another internet expert.
To me you're a very helpful chap, with tonnes of knowledge

However, I do feel the need to at least try to shut the others buggers up. Doubt it will happen but hey worth a try.
To me, whilst I don't particularly like failure, I do embrace it. As it is an important part of learning, and I will never stop learning.

I will design & build my own roots blower, as it'll be fun to do so, and whilst blowing my own trumpet I am pretty good in the machine shop.
Having said that I have found quite a few used supercharger units on Ebay for not a lot of money, as well as a load of turbos.
So, for the sake of doing to right, I'll just pick up appropriate used examples, and work with those.
The only problem is it'll have to wait until after moving house and the pennies have recovered enough to able to do so.
But in the meantime, there is nothing stopping me to getting on with the root blower design work.
Which if people are interested I will post a new thread detailing it.

The biggest con to a supercharger is the main reason I'll never own one again (or a naturally aspirated vehicle) --- power loss at altitude. Turbos, despite an increased lag, negate the power losses experienced at elevation. That is the biggest feather in the turbocharger's cap. I hate the idea of losing power, just because I'm driving up a mountain. I'd rather have a smaller, less powerful turbocharged motor with consistent power at various elevations than a more powerful supercharged motor and succumb to a 3% loss every 1k feet.

This is something I am not looking forward to one month from now, as I have to drag a trailer over the Massif Central in France and two mountain ranges in Spain to get to Portugal.
Which is one of the reasons I am thinking of using our other car, an Audi A4 3.0TDi to do it, as it will only have a handful of Sheep in it, so braking should not be an issue.
And, drive the HJ60 down without any load hanging off the back.

 

[Ky1e]

The wheels are balanced individually but you will still need to have the whole assembly balanced as well.

Cheers! Just as I expected..

Next question.. I have lined up a supra turbo to pinch the comp wheel and cover off, I've already rebuilt my turbo, but I was flicking through the kinugawa website and eyeing off some of the goodies there.
Should I just buy their 60-1 wheel and cover and throw that on my turbo with one of their adjustable wastegates, Or am I better off going g with the supra mod?

 

[gerg]

Dougal is well respected and just happens to be telling you that the earth in fact is not flat. However, every single member here who knows a cold side from a hot side agrees with his opinion because it is not his opinion, but rather, a fact that the only thing super about a supercharger is its name. It really should be called an expensive waste charger. The only diesel it belongs on is a two stroke, and even then it should be a turbo-supercharger. The supercharger should only be there to keep it running at idle.

It's....
More expensive
More parasitic losses
More difficult to mount
Less options for tuning your specific engine
Less effecient compressor, and I mean a lot less effecient, like a turbo running in the desert without an air filter for a couple years and its blades are worn to nothing will still be able to boast a more effecient compressor than a supercharger
The list is much longer, and a side by side comparison tells you it's just not worth the effort. The concept is flawed from the start.

That being said the supercharger from the opening scene in road warrior was a watershed moment for me with forced induction. Although, If Max had a turbocharger he wouldn't have needed to turn off his blower when he got low on gas, he'd only have had to take his foot out of it.....doh. Bad choice of technology max. And serously Max when the world comes to an end wouldn't a diesel have been a better choice.........?

The fact is though that Dougal cares enough to spend a lot of time trying to educate you technically. Most of us are just happy to see you try and reinvent a fairly square wheel from scratch. I'd like to say I wish you luck. If this was one of those cute engines that sits on your desk and runs to impress your coworkers that would be one thing, but you are going to put a huge effort into some thing and will never post up results.....surprise....like all the other amazing supercharger installs....and you will wonder why no one tried to help you out.

Thanks Dougal for trying to help him out.
g