The torque booster setup produced almost 100 rwhp and 92 more lb/ft of torque over the 3.6 pulley in the 5-6,000 rpm range. It only produced a little bit more rwhp and torque than the 3.47 pulley in the midrange, but we were able to pull almost 6 degrees of timing back out of it to produce those numbers.
The torque booster isn’t showing huge gains on the chart over a 3.47, but it allows me to run a lot less timing and provides a much safer curve should I drive the car at lower altitudes. The wastegate will blow off the excess boost, and the lower timing should keep me in a safer range than I was running with the 3.47.
The verdict: I am extremely happy with the results. My goal was to pick up a little bit in the mid-range, where I actually like to drive and shift the car. If you are looking for huge top end horsepower numbers then go with a little bit larger pulley and throw a ton of timing at it. If you have a 3.6 pulley (or especially the stock 3.8 on the Paxton), then skip the 3.47 and go straight to this setup.
QUOTE]
I think the that you made close to the same power with 3.3 vs 3.47 with 6 degrees less timing is huge!!!! And that is why the TQ numbers are very close between the two. I wonder if you added more timing in the lower rpm range could you get more TQ with the 3.3 and than taper it more on the top RPM band. I think with TQ booster there are more tuning options allowing for faster and more responsive driving paxton setup. Glad you are happy and it has better street manors!
OK, I'm not arguing, just trying to understand... You guys keep saying "it's safer cuz it has 6* less timing"... The less timing doesn't correlate directly because you are running DIFFERENT CYLINDER PRESSURES. It's like saying "my motor is safer because I'm only running 10* of timing advance" and failing to realize you're using 25psi of boost to make the power. Know what I'm saying?
More Beefcake Torque Booster R&D
- Thread starter ColoStang12
- Start date
Still less boost and timing than his previous setup. So I would say it is safer...
You installed the wastegate setup to give yourself more low end torque, and then pulled timing to give yourself the same exact power you already had. You made a little more power from 5200rpms up, but isn't the whole point of this kit to make more midrange?
That makes no sense... Less boost and less timing on the same motor will NEVER give you more power
Did you mean MORE boost and less timing?
No less boost and less timing just coming in sooner in the rpm band. I would put a little more timing down low but his engine not mine.
Oh, you are saying less PEAK boost, and less timing. That seems like too vague of a statement that is misleading. He is running MORE boost in the midrange.
I guess my whole issue with the claim that it is safer in the midrange because of less timing is: Is (using totally fictitious numbers to simplify things) 10psi of boost with 5* of timing safer than 5psi of boost with 10* of timing, if they both make the same power??? To make the same exact power, you would need the same exact cylinder pressures.
CPRsm
Active Member
No, I know what you're saying. Removing timing does not automatically make it safer. He's making more power, then there is more cylinder pressure either way you look at it. More cylinder pressure leads to the problems and broken parts. More power w less timing does not mean safer.
Last edited:
Thank you
Be careful. Saying its not safe will lead beefcake just to come in and say you dont know how a wastegate setup work!!
He doesn't make more peak power actually less and it is a lot more linear than a turbo/pd setup on torque curve which that means the rods won't see instant on torque stress in for mentioned setups. So I will agree more low end stress but not anything like a turbo or PD. as well as running less timing at the top end giving a more room for error at least with detonation is concerned. So give and take but I would say it is safer as a whole.
Lol, I def know how a wastegate setup works... and no matter how hard you try, you'll never make it as good as a turbo...
LOL... I KID I KID
It's not that the W/G setup is unsafe, it's just not "safer because you're running less timing". Yes, you're running less timing, but a lot higher cylinder pressures.
LOL... I KID I KID
It's not that the W/G setup is unsafe, it's just not "safer because you're running less timing". Yes, you're running less timing, but a lot higher cylinder pressures.
Last edited:
Just go turbo.
End of thread!
End of thread!
CPRsm
Active Member
Now you went and done it!!! Lol
Kind of. I think you're confusint cyl pressure a little w piston dwell. At a high cyl pressure when the piston speed is slower can cause rod problems. Ie nitrous below 3k. But over all I think you're right the setup is safe because the engine isn't spinning as high, even if it makes a little more down low. I just wouldn't say it's because he removed timing, know what I mean?
Everything else the turbo will still stress her a little less. At 600rwhp we'll say, the blowers are all making more at the crank to achieve the same rwhp. Less cyl pressure for the same rwhp. Back pressure can also help believe it or not. The exh stroke is the worst part of your engines life. Piston comes up when exh valve opens and changes directions almost instantly with no counter acting force. This puts stress on parts in their weakess form, tensile strength. Back pressure pushes back a little relieving some, not all of the stress.
Good info thanks for the knowledge!
Any engine is most prone to detonate at peak cylinder pressure.
Cylinder pressure is directly related to Torque output and Heat.
IE, the torque curve is the Cylinder pressure curve and any engine is most prone to detonate at Peak Torque.
All things being equal, adding boost at Peak Torque on limited octane (pump gas) is NEVER safer than less boost on the same octane.
RPM (IMO) is not a problem with these engines, nor is more boost at higher RPM as boost increases well past peak cylinder pressure (Peak Torque).
You should also take into account the physical time for detonation to occur. At 3000RPM there is DOUBLE the time to detonate then at 6000RPM. EI, the higher in the RPM band peak torque occurs, the less 'time' it has to detonate. The speed of the flame front is time dependent, so more RPM, less likely to detonate. Think about the very high compression / high reving motorcycle engines.
Cylinder pressure is directly related to Torque output and Heat.
IE, the torque curve is the Cylinder pressure curve and any engine is most prone to detonate at Peak Torque.
All things being equal, adding boost at Peak Torque on limited octane (pump gas) is NEVER safer than less boost on the same octane.
RPM (IMO) is not a problem with these engines, nor is more boost at higher RPM as boost increases well past peak cylinder pressure (Peak Torque).
You should also take into account the physical time for detonation to occur. At 3000RPM there is DOUBLE the time to detonate then at 6000RPM. EI, the higher in the RPM band peak torque occurs, the less 'time' it has to detonate. The speed of the flame front is time dependent, so more RPM, less likely to detonate. Think about the very high compression / high reving motorcycle engines.
Last edited:
I def understand and agree with what youre saying Shaun. The paxton setup is obviously easier on your motor at peak tq/cyl pressure, and then it adds boost after you pass the "dangerous zone". PD blowers are going to be more stress on the motor, but I am more than willing to give up a little longevity for the pull in the midrange
Users who are viewing this thread
