Nolan Penney wrote:
>
> 1. the Spitfire lower end would never hold up to the stress of sustained
>boost.
>
> It's a matter of how much boost. It'll hold up just fine to mild boost.
I have never been known for doing anything in a "mild" manner!
> 2. engineering the fuel injection part of it would have been very expensive
>and using a conventional carb would add to the problems of reliability due to
>the lack of lubrication of the supercharger's pump.
>
> Obtaining a Bosch L-Jetronic fuel injection system would cost no more then
>$100.
> It's well suited for blower use, and is regularly installed in such
>applications by the
> thousands nearly every day.
>
> Carburetor use would not affect oil supply in any way, and is even easier to
>install.
It's not oil supply I was thinking of but the actual heating of the veins in
the turbo due to heat generated in the compression process. Water
injection is a possibility but compressing the fuel and air mixture is better.
>
> 3. Obtaining a supercharger suitable for that particular engine was way too
>expensive, not to mention fabricating an intake.
>
> Fabricating the intake would take some work, but the V6 supercharger used by
>Ford
> is a good small size and available for a few hundred dollars regularly on
>e-bay and in
> junkyards. Turbocharger mounting is even easier and cheaper.
One thing I did not mention was the problem of compression. YOu would need to
reduce the compression ration of the engine or the added boost would
create an equivalent compression ratio sufficient to require the use of racing
fuel.
Joe
/// spitfires@autox.team.net mailing list
/// or try http://www.team.net/cgi-bin/majorcool
|