Forced induction question???

anthony05gt said:

Typically a roots style blower does not make the top end power of a twin screw and both have gobs of power down low. The new TVS blower is much better than previous roots systems, but I haven't seen a dyno sheet for the TVS yet.

Click to expand...

Again....the TVS is not a "Roots Blower" and you seem to be confusing the two. The differences between the 1st and 5th Gen Eaton as well as the new 6th Gen TVS is night are day.

A traditional "Roots" style blower has a strait cut 2-loeb design with the inlet entrance mid set within the case. Holley/Weiand blowers still use this design if I'm not mistaken? They're nice because their inexpensive, very reliable and can be built to mammoth proportions to suit any engine displacement, but they're not exactly the most efficient design out there.

The 3rd Gen Eaton’s weren't even considered traditional Roots blowers anymore, because of their newer 60-degree 3-lobe twist rotor design, with closer tolerances and more efficient rear entry inlet (3rd Gen). By all definitions, they're at best considered a Hybrid Roots design and are far superior to their predecessor.

Eaton went one step further having Magnuson design the 4th and 5th Generation MP Series superchargers, (which to be honest would be more comparable to a Modern Twin Screw than the TVS would).

The 4th and 5th Gen Eaton’s have a completely different case design that increased both strength and rigidity (which allowed for closer tolerances), as well as a drastically improved inlet/outlet design for increased efficiency and lesser horsepower consumption They’re now also built with an integrated internal bypass valve and have the option for coated rotors which improved tolerances further still (5th Gen). They’re far.....far superior to the old strait cut "Roots" blowers that we all so commonly refer to them as and aren’t even in the same league by comparison.

Magnuson recently compared the 5th Gen MP design to that of a modern Twin Screw (an Magnuson MP112 vs. a Whipple 2300) on a 5.3L LS series engine. The engine was completely stock with the exception of a custom camshaft and Z06 valve springs. When pitted up against one and other, the MP112 bested the Whipple by 50lbs/ft of torque at 1,500RPM and continued to outperform the larger Twin screw until 5,700RPM where at nearly the end of the power band the 2300 finally took the lead. In the end though, the Whipple 2300’s top end victory was attributed to its larger displacement (2.3L vs. 1.85L) and therefore deeper breathing capability over the Eaton MP112 and not because it was the more efficient design of the two. Truth be told, they're actually very comparable to one and other. I've seen one make as much horsepower as the other on various applications. Just the other day rfedd emailed my Dyno results from a mildly modified 2-Valve Saleen with Tork Teck blower kit on it. It utilized a 5th Generation Magnuson supercharger and made 520 rwhp and 549.50 rwtq @ 14psi. That’s as good (or better) as any Twin Screw I've ever seen.

anthony05gt said:

I doubt it makes the same top end power as a twin screw.

Click to expand...

Don’t be so sure of that. Comparing smaller displacement, earlier model Eaton’s or lesser comparable Centrifugal Superchargers to larger, more robust Twin Screw compressors is an advertising propaganda that companies like Kenne Bell is all too familiar with. They do this in order to make the Twin Screw’s top end efficiency levels look much greater than they actually are. I mean.....if they make more power up top, it must be because the blower itself is more efficient, right? There's no way it could have anything at all to do with the sheer difference in the displacement between the two, right? As long as people keep eating it up, they’ll keep preaching it too.

As a matter of fact, without even seeing the two run head to head I can ensure you that with all things being equal, the TVS will make more top end power. The TVS blower takes things even further than its 5th Generation predecessor with an improved case design, 160-degree twist 4-loeb high helix rotor design and an advance 180-degree rear entry inlet and high velocity outlet. Flow ratings are improved further still and horsepower consumption is reduced. And since there is no internal compression (unlike a modern Twin Screw which compresses air all the time.....whether you’re under pressure, or not), discharge temperature are actually lower by comparison as a result.