Video není dostupné.
Omlouváme se.
Whipple Vs. Roots SUPERCHARGERS | Building a Monster Truck Engine Pt 7
Vložit
- čas přidán 13. 10. 2019
- After killing the Roots-style 10-71 supercharger, Gale decided to switch to a screw-style 5.0L Whipple. To truly know which is better, he compares the two side-by-side with no intercooling. Watch to find out which supercharger out-performs the other!
Part 1: • Data Logging | Buildin...
Part 2: • Monster Mutt Data | Bu...
Part 3: • Methanol Dyno Testing ...
Part 4: • Behind the Scenes | Bu...
Part 5: • FIRST FIRE! | Building...
Part 6: • We KILLED a Supercharg...
Instruments shown in this video: iDash DataMonster
www.bankspower...
Realize this man is passing on his knowledge he spent his lifetime learning. You could pay tens of thousands of dollars to a college and not get as much information.
EXACTLY!!!
I’ve always liked that he’s a wealth of information without being a jerk about it.
And there are still guys that want to argue with him about his choices. lol I think I'll bank on Banks'.
well as an engineer i could calculate all this data and come to the same conclusions as Banks , but Id much rather watch Banks do it. much more entertaining than staring at my calculator for a few hours. and now with his data i could revers the calculation and figure out what realistic variables to use and do multiple engines of various configurations , not just superchargers on a duramax. thats the power of engineering. not having to actually test every single possible combination to see the possibilities.
I've watched this 3x and learned "banks of wisdom"on sc!!! IF MR.BANKS was selling palm trees at the North Pole i'de buy all of them...THANKS ALOT
"So stop popping off!" Got to love his generation.
I always smile while watching good old mister BANKS!!!!
I came here to comment the same thing.
C.J. Edwards 🤣
@@bankspower Me too. Kind of surprised someone would make the comment. I thought it was obvious that he's conducting an experiment. You only change one variable at a time in good science and Gale does good science.
Im so happy that Mr Banks is investing so much into his CZcams channel, so we mere mortals can at least hope to learn a bit from all his experience. Thank you, Mr. Banks!
I would love to see a test like this re-done comparing an Eaton Style Roots Blower with their High Helix 4-lobe Rotors vs a traditional Whipple Screw Blower. I am mainly interested to see how far the Roots has come in terms of efficiency with the new rotor designs vs the screw blower.
High helix stuff can net you some margin of improvement. Few other things in the design matter as well.
But for roots effiency. The best thing you can do is really low AR ratios. Meaning the super charger sizing becomes much more important. You usually oversize to get less rpms for a given boost pressure. But the idea is that plus having it remain over sized and lower the ar ratios not just reduce the rpms. Under driven makes it act smaller. If it's oversized but under driven and then at ideal sizing doesn't work.
The aerospace industry up to ww2 and a bit passed that is the best area to search for roots blower stuff.
This mans supercharher is bigger than my engine.
"You have got a belt driven turbo. Why would anybody do THAT?" 🤣
This has been a pet rant of mine for years.
space , weight , rules of classes , is the only reason i can now imagine why somebody would use one. Some classes of racing dont allow you to have anything more than a cowl hood , and there is no muscle car you can fit a big block Chevy into , with a 1071 on top with an intake hat with out having it protruding way out of the hood. ergo just mount a procharger in front of the engine where there is lots of room especially in a car with the engine moved back. you could maybe mount a whipple in front of the engine like old rail cars used to do with roots blowers and have it directly connected to the crank with a gear box but 99% of cars probably cant fit that either with out heavy modifications which take it out of contention in a ton of racing classes.
Colton Robinson there’s about one reason I can see
You run one on a cvt gearbox to get it into its efficiency zone sooner and keep it in it longer and you match its maximum rpm to peak engine rpm and then use a blowoff valve to vary airflow
It’s also smaller and easier to package than a big blower
Stupid people
As far as I'm concerned, the benefit of a centrifugal blower is that you can lift the throttle, then slam back on it and get good response. I looked at a fair number of graphs, and there's like a 3000 RPM window, so centrifugals are perfectly fine for manual applications with a good driver. Of course yes, by de-coupling the turbine from the crank, it becomes coupled through integrated time and load.
@@MyLonewolf25 . My thoughts exactly .. the blower is wastegated on partial power demand . Even better is to stall the compressor totally too ease the parasitic load . Love these vids
The other guy smiled, twice!!! 😂😂😂😂
This is the comment I was looking for! Lol. I didn't know that he had it in him!
Everyone that works for Banks is scared shiteless
@@TheAnonymous1one
Listening to Gale, I'd be laughing out loud!!
Derek Schmucker p.
3:17 the guys was like oh shit I just smile just after lollll
Can’t wait for the turbo chargers!! Going to be wild!!!
After this series I’m going to be officially CZcams certified.
Wanted to say thank you Banks. Don't listen to anybody who is criticizing what you're doing in anyway if they don't understand something then they're obviously not paying attention.
all the boost Banks is an authoritative source...everyone else has no street cred...they should all feel like a tool telling an expert what they no nothing of and what Gale arguably knows best....
Who critizes science?
Thank you for making these videos, you can tell a lot of time and energy has gone into making them.
I really like that we’re getting into the heart of it all. No repeating of what we already know! Thumbs up!
simple physics. the Whipple excites the air less so you get lower temperature and if it excites it less it is moving it more efficiently. Gale you are the man with the numbers. 👌👌
twin screw blowers are more efficient is because it compresses air inside the blower while the roots does not.
Imagine the whipple has to compress a volume and then push it out into a manifold of equal pressure, while the roots opens the cavity to manifold pressure and has to push the entire volume out at that max pressure instead of starting easy.
This is acually a thermodynamic problem, so fluid dynamics are at the very least not the only reason.
I've read somewhere that the purpose of these 71-series blowers is to provide air for scavenging two stroke 71-series diesels at up to 3000rpm but most often around 2000rpm. Not to provide dense boost air. In an untuned diesel these blowers performed reliably at a reasonable cost. That's what they're made for, and that's where they shine.
I myself am a fan of turbo and intercooler for my diesel engines. But being Swedish, I can't ignore the engineering genius of Alf Lysholm (Lys-holm). Apart from the rotary twin screw compressor, he also invented the hydraulic torque converter and an axial flow turboprop engine.
The Detroit Diesel were 2 cycles (53,71,92,110,148 series represented the cubic inchs displacement of a single cylinder, engines were available from one the 16 cylinder) the blower was used to create positive pressures on the intake side pushing clean air in and exhaust out. Just imagine a 148 series 16 cyl.😉
@@dadillen5902 Yes and for their intended purpose, the blowers were perfectly adequate.
Ola Eriksson that's for letting us know about things Alf invented. I often hear Konegsegg rave about Swedish engineering and design, it doesn't get enough credit.
This is one of the most informative and data-driven explanations between standard positive displacement blower, and a positive displacement screw compressor. Absolutely amazing video, enjoyed every second and learned so much... graphs and data are everything!
The knowledge at 19:00 minute mark blew up the Internet.nice work.
This man tends to blow up the internet every time it comes to diesel performance, and I love it so much!!
I absolutely love the data rich content! Anybody complaining about Gale not running an intercooler on these, CLEARLY, is not familiar with his work.
Wow what a great comparison! That’s quite an improvement over the roots blower. I knew screw compressors were generally a little more efficient but I didn’t know they were that much more efficient. I’m impressed. I can’t wait to see what’s next!
There are very few channels I can say I absolutely love.... this is one of them!!! I can not say it enough, THANK YOU GALE BANKS!!! Thank you so much for sharing this knowledge with us plebs! You are one of the few people that explains things so well, breaks down things so well, that have been applying what I learn to tuning cars myself!
Edit: Also, GOOD GOD that Duramax and Whipple set up sound freaking amazing, plus, the lovely noises of the Pike's Peak beast....... oh man I was about to pass out :)
👍's up MR. power thanks for taking us along with you
Good Lord, give a guy a warning before you switch that Freightliner, that thing is loud!
And I was wearing my headset! Ouch.
My ears are bleeding but it was worth it
haha yea I had ear buds in and that was a hit
I'm already just about deaf. Quit headphones.
But, I did have a supercharger 10 years ago. ( Paxton SN95 centrifugal type) 454 4X4 GMC
Got rid of it and kept the truck, though
missingremote nice man.
Seeing him get so giddy about horsepower and torque figures makes you have that warm fuzzy feeling!
You're like the dad that loves trucks and cars that everyone wants. Keep it up man.
To achieve the best video efficiency you have to run it at 1.5 speed. It's how you overcome the Banks blower lag and get the best data density.
Um , touche' !
I literally do that because old man Banks speaks fluent glue, man how annoying
You're the man
BWAHAHAHAHAHA! he speaks like a teacher/instructor. I appreciate him taking the time to speak slowly to give folks like me time to ingest the information.
@@derkmerv6725
He has forgotten more than most will ever know - he's a Smokey who doesn't have long to past on his knowlege to a new generation
Before this test, I was confused on why you went with a 1071 and not going to a screw blower from the start. I 100% get it now. Thanks for the knowledge drop as always.
I love the scientific approach taking out as many variables as possible. So I know I want a twin screw style not a roots
Dr. Banks hitting the winning whipple combo points...!! Thank you Gale..!!
Loved this episode!! So much good info on the two superchargers, thank you!
Mr. Banks, thank you for these videos. Quality science, quality explanations backed with real world proof. I couldn’t ask for more. Thank you.
I could watch your videos 24-7. So informative and everything makes so much sense. You are a great educator Professor Banks!
Gale banks this is absolutely amazing your answering questions I didn't even have yet i love the fact that your a diesel tuner that knows what an air fuel ratio is
I feel like I need to send Professor Banks a tuition check each time I watch his videos.
🤣🤣🤣
This man is an icon data monster he's what a tuner should always look like doesn't matter the form of fuel or engine he speaks knowledge so many tuners in every genre could learn from him from small displacement 4s on up he's a genius
3:16 bro next to gale looks like a marine thinking about his favourite crayon flavour for a split second till the reality sets in from his life choices
They haven't killed the duramax yet but succeeded in killing the hell outta my eardrums at 1:17 of this video 😂
Huge fan of your work, mad scientist of air density
Cleetus needs to see this. He’d make another 200+ HP over his 10-71. It might not look quite as awesome, but HP>looks in my book...
i was thinking the same thing, but his car has already shipped
Had the same thought, and you could still run a crazy looking blower hat, it would just look way more intense. That big block is pretty weak for what it is. But then again, it doesnt need 2000hp to be a badass burnout car.
Not sure that crew would understand...
Anyone named Cletus eats their own shit.
@@enigma9789 I was thinking the same thing. He doesn't *need* more power, but that 632 is not that impressive numbers wise under boost.
His new title is "Professor" Gale Banks, we're learning stuff you would see in an advanced engineering classroom.
Great video, like someone said, I'm in school again only to enjoy it this time. Thanks
This episiode was just beautiful... thank you
This is great info for me, along with what your doing with that Ford Lighting. I have a 99 GMC 5.7 Vortec Motor with a 1.0 L Whipple on it. These set ups back then were very limited, but today with the advancements in computer tuning, fuel delivery it's been better. Now it's time to see what I can do with cooling the air charge, etc. I wish I could work with Mr. Banks on my set up even though it's small and out dated. I still love the info he provides on how and what works. Thank you!!
I really appreciate all the knowledge your sharing. I learned so much watching the videos. Great videos. Thanks for making the videos. I really enjoy rhe videos. Thanks for your time
Thank you for sharing your knowledge.
This guy is a smart SOB. Love it!
I love how much data you put out @BanksPower . I always loved nerding out over the numbers. Seeing a true engineer like Gale morph into half a movie star doing these videos and watching how knowledgable he is and how much fun hes having is great. I hope you have a son or some employee your grooming to take over in your shoes someday!
👍🏻
Holy hell. Where have I been the last 20 years. 😳😳😳 getting Gale in front of a camera for these series builds really does showcase his genius. Guy is just astounding with the amount of knowledge he has. Now I’m itching to get some of his parts in my truck. Lol
Thanks for the compliments! We're ready with parts when you are. 😉
Man Im actually learning stuff, thanks Banks.
How's that 2.8l duramax tune coming along? Can't wait to get one!
Love it ! Keep it up Gale your enthusiasm keeps you young! 💪🏻👌🏻🇺🇸
I'm Nick Sadd's son in law of Sadd,Teague and Bentley. Gale helped the 76' roadster set some world records. So don't question his authority lol! They don't make em like Gale anymore!
15:49 this graph really explains why those old 2 stroke diesels had roots blowers in the first place even when a better alternative was available. Those old 2 strokes never really revved up too high and the blower wasn't run a bunch faster than crank. Whipples are usually more expensive due to machining those crazy screws so the cheaper roots would do the same job for less cost.
The smaller 53 series could do 2800rpm in marine applications but the 71 and 92 series motors rarely did much more than 2100. So the roots was always better for those slower engines anyways.
Always interesting to watch!
Okay @ 11;25 when he tells us kids to stop popping off that made my damn night!!
12 months from now: Banks announces his version of the screw type super charger.
Always a good day when you can say, "Hi, I'm ______ , and this is my brand new 5.0 liter Whipple supercharger."
Ok, I'm ready for part 8!
Unfortunately he did not explain WHY the belt driven centrifugal supercharger has a bigger lag then a complete turbo charger system. And why the latter one is beaten by roots and whipple type chargers in throttle response.
That difference , and how partially to cure it, is one of the things I love to have found out. 😁😁😁😁😁😁
Still , it is a brilliant video !!!!!! Gale has the same enthousiam as my 84 year old dad about his profession . That keeps the old , but young at mind and brains, striving in educating and transferring their knowledge!!!!!!!!!!!!
Keep going Gale , hope for at least 102 years!!!!
That's what makes America great again. Banks is a real gear head. Keep up the great work.
👍🏻
@@bankspower hay I got 2015 1500 5.3. That's needs your help. I was think of putting a whipple supercharger. But I'm not sure if my heads or my cam need to be changed in order to produce the right horsepower without breaking the engine. Thank you
All that lost horsepower in the roots was just heating up the air, nothing else. Can't wait to see Whipple+Turbo combo....
I woke up dreading the start of this week... but then Gale came along and said there would be class today! I always learn something, or at the least correct something I didn't have right in my mind
I luv you Mr. Banks. I would never pop off to you. You are the man. Built my first engine 32 years ago. Followed men like Smokey Yunik. Soon became a diesel mech in the late eighties. I've installed more of your kits on pickups let me tell you. Intercoolers? Yeah you've got intercoolers.
Thank you for yet another awesome video. 😍
Very educational and thank you for doing the videos you do
I'm not a mechanic, I'm a pilebuck. But this answered questions I've been asking about Whipple.
Thank you Mr. Banks. Another informative video from a man who loves numbers more then I do
Can't wait to see the intercooler numbers , very cool stuff .
Mr. Banks isn't pulling any punches today boys.
Banks is a legend
My goodness 👀. That supercharger’s displacement is an engine...
It's over twice the size of of many engines.
Besides being twice the size of many engines, they draw more power than many engines make. The +58hp on the Whipple is basically saved parasitic draw, the total is 200+.
Thank you, Mr. Banks! I've read all over the internet about how roots is the same as or better than twinscrew, how centripetal supercharger is the better supercharger in every aspect, and the darned "why don't you just turbo it?". This video proved, with data, that twinscrew is really the sweet spot for efficient, positive-displacement supercharging for instant response. And I love what you said about centripetal SC, why would anyone want a belt-driven turbo?!
Amazing the amount of work you put into everything you do.
So informative Banks
You know, listening to Gale talk about boost being a meaningless number, I am reminded of oil pressure. People like high oil pressure, but if you're using a lower weight oil, you're still getting the same flow, but at lower pressure. Because the pump is a gear pump, the flow will be the same at the same engine speed. So I'm convinced to run a lower viscosity for cold starts, so the flow is less restricted on start up. The start up pressure is going to be higher than the running pressure at operating temp, no matter the viscosity.
Awesome test Mr. Banks! I’m looking to upgrade my 6-71 roots, and I’ve been looking at all the latest and greatest roosts “re-designs.” No matter how big you go they all have the same problem. I recently discovered Whipple makes a W510R, which is 8.3L. Designed to be a direct replacement for 71 series blowers. Massive, yes but I’m trying to push air through a 565 Ci BBC. Definitely the way to go. Now just gotta save up and get one!
Sounds really good compaired to the 10-71 which sounded pretty cool too.
0:34 5000 revs on a diesel? damn wow
You need a big cam, good heads and really big injectors because the injection time is so short. This thing is a 7l so might have a billet crank.
I've seen 8400 rpm in smaller diesel racing engines like 1.9 TDI.
Awesome video. My favorite content on youtube. I want to see how a Centrifugal supercharger stacks up to them and a turbo. Please do this test next!
Thank you! We probably won't be testing a centrifugal supercharger. A screw-style is the best for this application.
@@bankspower That's why you do the testing though haha, to prove it!! I assume it's because of diesel's lower rpm working range? I think maybe a centrifugal with a nice intercooler would work great if geared in the correct operating range. But you guys probably know more
Looking at how wide the efficient island of this blower is, there is almost no point. Between 68 and 71% efficiency at 3200-5000 rpm even the best centrifugal blower probably couldn't beat it. The problem gets even worse once they hang a.couple turbos on it and the blower doesn't start making any boost until 3k rpm and the turbine housings are sized for a 430 cubic inch engine with a ton of boost on it. You really need to take a look at just how good these blowers really are. They are dimensionally huge but really do deliver the goods over just about anything else.
Just for the heck of it I think you should compare one of those crank driven turbos you were talking about to the Whipple/ Roots. You know for science.
They're garbage for what he wants to do with this though... i agree for science, but it's basically a waste of time.
Wow that is some serious testing and comparison roots to screw...I actually understood this, if I take it slow. I have been dying to build a supercharged sbc, this makes me think!!
You made an error at 10:25, as the comparison needs to be done in Kelvin not in Fahrenheit. Difference is only 8% (436K/403K).
I love that you are passing on your knowledge, for all of us to learn. Keep it up. Thanks.
Awesome vid! Really informational!!!
He's definitely right about the centrifugal blowers.
That said, for a manual transmission application that's able to keep the revs up, centrifugals are perfectly fine.
I'm guessing Banks doesn't like centrifugals for other reasons. We see centrifugals run from 4000-7500 rpm. But Banks is trying to run a possibly sub 2500 RPM torque converter, with an RPM window of 2000-4500 or even 1000. So, that screws things up for centrifugals. A lower stall will aggravate the situation. Plus, moving the center of operating range from 6000 RPM to 2500 RPM will more than double the pulley ratio, which causes geometry problems. You need a smaller top pulley to get the ratio, but then the cog belt might not mesh properly, so you end up needing a bigger bottom pulley that might get in the way of other stuff.
The thing about turbos is the way they're coupled to the engine.
Turbos are coupled through a mathematical integration of load, time, and rate.
So, for example, BAD=(integral 1 - Integral 2)
Integral 1 is computed for 1.6 seconds into the future. (Load*rate*time) 100 slices of time, throw away numbers older than 1.6 seconds.
Integral 2 is computed for 2.7 seconds into the past. (Load*rate*time) 100 slices of time, throw away numbers older than 2.7 seconds.
You end up with boost air density that changes based on what you've been doing, rather than you forcing it to have a specific duty.
Spool up an 88mm turbo, let go of the gas, then get back on it. You end up having to re-spool a little bit, unless you had a heavy turbine, but then it takes forever to spool anyway. You're expected to know what you want and what you're doing. Damn.
Having done my fair share of NMCA racing - spool on 88’s isn’t an issue. At all. There’s a reason why they put weight on turbo cars and limited inducer size - because nitrous and centrifugal DISAPPEARED.
The historical facts and information were cool
I've been intercooling for 50 years stop poppin off already 😂😂😂😂
Huge respect to gale! This is awesome data!
now i want to see the difference between a Whipple and roots on a E85 fueled big block chevy which has the injection hat before the blower. I imagine the efficiency difference wouldn't be quite so large but thats why i want to see a test.
I think Toast is already in Australia.
Whipple will make more power than the roots given the same displacement blower case. Screw blowers have helical overlapping lobes that pump much more efficiently than the Roots straight lobes. Wetting straight lobes won’t overcome the pumping losses. Been there, done that.
He's hunting for the best case scenario for a baseline. Intercoolers can mask fundamental problems. I'm excited to see what style of turbos are used and how they're set up.
OMG they were really telling you about intercooling. !?? Jack Wagons.. I guess they don't know who you are Mr. Banks. ! Lol
Thank God someone got this man a CZcams channel...they say when chuck Norris went to school to become the man he is Gale banks was his teacher
😄😄😄
@@bankspower
Is that actually you mr. Banks I totally understand if it someone who helps you keep up the channel but if it is you I'll probably have a smile on my face for the next 24 hours even mr. Norris couldn't slap off
Bet he used roots to teach us a lesson. Awesome 😎
Thanks for this video. Being the well respected super charger fella you are this just settled a dispute between me an a friend.
13:01 The comparison between centrifugal super and turbo. I think you need to revisit this comparison, as there's also now electric motor driven setups. RPM for RPM, they'd function the same, but the special thing about electric driven chargers is that they're entirely disconnected from the ICE engine's output, so you're not reliant on crank RPM or exhaust flow rate, meaning you can tune an electrically driven charger for the application. I also assume you could, though I personally haven't seen this done, find a way to drive a roots, screw, vane, scroll, or any type of compressor with an electric motor, rather than depend on crank RPM of the ICE motor, which would also be an interesting comparison to see.
It's interesting to see a diesel use about the same mass air as my 2.4l inline 4, I usually log between 38-42lb/min on my setup. The intake density info really hits home as well; you can have a high boost number and it means nothing if it's hot air. I experimented with a season using a smaller vertical flow intercooler, and ran 170 degree IAT out of it one weekend, switched to a longer horizontal core that had a bit more pressure drop but more surface area, and saw about a 40 degree drop when accounting for ambient. I have not got to retest on the dyno but it was a noticeable difference in ET and I bet it will be the same on the dyno too.
Didn't even noticed there was an engine under that supercharger at first. The air filters caught my eye.
That's why I've always been a turbo guy. I know that superchargers have their place, but for most applications I don't see the point behind an engine that needs to make 1000hp just to put 750hp to the flywheel. That's just energy wasted and extra wear and tear on the engine. I much prefer a turbo that makes use of energy that would otherwise be wasted in order to create more power.
Look at all those people standing on the side of the hill climb road, just waiting for their turn to win the highly coveted Darwin award.
Fascinating results.
What sweet sound!!!
Mr. Banks have you worked on any Ford Modular motor. I know they have a small displacement but their cylinder flow is very impressive, and they love RPM. Love your Informative videos.
"...so stop poppin' off!!! Enough already." LMAO!
Thinking about the power gain when speeding the sc down - my thoughts are:
When pressurerized air enters the sc inlet the screws try to trap the air and move it along for further compression, but what if the inlet chamber is open so long that the air is sort of pushed back against the turbo causing only a very little amount of air to be actually compressed and worse - what if the boosted air acts as a negative force on the screw surface area creating an unwanted parasitic loss - in the same way a high turbine drive pressure will act as extra parasitic loss on the piston crown?
That could maybe explain why power increased when lowering sc speed. Simply less power is needed to drive the sc - and the powerloss goes straight to the crank and not as heat in the air.
Cant wait to hear your conclusions.
Peter - Denmark - Europe
Imagine telling Gale Banks that he isn’t doing it right. Intercooler, turbo, super charging, NA engines... yeah, he has done all that at a higher level than 99% of the population. For decades. Not that he can’t learn, that’s what these vids are, but the simple stuff he has down pat.
He uses the scientific approach to learn. One step at a time with full understanding of why a step made a change. With documentation. Makes him a better human to impart knowledge with background and evidence so we can all enjoy the results.
Still, seeing a roots type blower on an engine erupting out of the hood just inspires gawking. Can’t help it. Not the most efficient or aerodynamic but yeah looks still have their place.
Well said.
And that’s why Whipple make a ‘Radial’ intake setup too! :)
The Whipple used here is an ‘axial’ intake arrangement with air being drawn from the rear of the unit.
The radial intake draws air from the top of the unit like a typical roots supercharger.
This way you get the old school supercharger look that we all love, a large capacity bolt on replacement with most of the twin screw advantages!
You do how ever loose at little efficiency (2-3%) due to the intake not being as optimised from the radial intake design.
It’s all on the Whipple website 👍