[NitrousG35]

This sounds totally backwards! Don't root s/c offer more poential than twin screw? That's how it's suppose to go...

You need to read what I posted earlier as well as what Nathen and Greg at Redshift said. While the Roots and Lysholm physically look similar, their perfomance aspects are indeed different.

Decide on how much boost you plan on running and what other mods you plan to do. Make your decisions accordingly. Talk to Greg at Redshift if you still are undecided.

 

[MRK20]

No the roots "lose breath" above about 8 psi and heat gets high above that for the Roots. The Twinscrew can maintain up to 20 psi without a problem.

Roots=blower
Twinscrew=compressor

Seriously, not to sound annoying, but can someone clarify. If what you say is true, then the "2nd advantage" in the following link for root s/c's is incorrect.

SuperchargersOnline.com :: Roots vs. Centrifugal vs. Screw Type Supercharging
And back to the ZR1. I know that my car is nothing like it, but I mention a supercar like it because it uses a root s/c. Why did they not get the twin-screw then? I mean if your gonna make a 650+ hp car and sell it for $100k why not go all out?


I just want to know which s/c has the most potential. Some please clarify...ray:

 

[Highrev1]

And the Ford GT uses a Twinscrew...The Twinscrew has potential to make more power, higher safer boost, and is more efficent at higher boost levels.

The new ZR1 utalizes a brand new style of roots charger called the TVS it is totally different than the roots that is sold now.It looks like this.

 

[MRK20]

And the Ford GT uses a Twinscrew...The Twinscrew has potential to make more power, higher safer boost, and is more efficent at higher boost levels.

The new ZR1 utalizes a brand new style of roots charger called the TVS it is totally different than the roots that is sold now.It looks like this.

So..........that site that was on my previous post is wrong?


Roots

Positive Points:
1) Boost throughout the entire RPM range, right off of idle
2) Highest Potential for Gain (A must-have for all-out drag racing)
3) Excellent Reliability
4) Great Appearance & Stature (Most common supercharger type for show vehicles)

 

[chilipepper]

It may have been correct at one time, but I believe that point #2 above is simply out of date information...

 

[MRK20]

It may have been correct at one time, but I believe that point #2 above is simply out of date information...

Maybe :shady:...it does say3/21/2001. I don't really know what to believe. It sucks when you are not confident with the information you receive, since your not sure it is 100% correct...

 

[Highrev1]

I have done the tsting....And can prove that the Twinscrew is better for higher boost.

 

[chilipepper]

^^^^^
MRK20, trust Highrev1 on this! :thumb:

 

[MRK20]

Did twin-screw technology all of a sudden get better after...what was it...3/21/2001?

 

[chilipepper]

Did twin-screw technology all of a sudden get better after...what was it...3/21/2001?

Partly cost:

"...This concept became a reality in the late 1930's and early 1940's when the Lysholm twin-screw supercharger was produced. Because of high building cost, the screw compressor did not find its way to OEM use on internal combustion engines, but industrial applications for air compressors, refrigeration and air-conditioning."

SuperchargersOnline.com :: Screw-Type Supercharging 101: An Intro to Whipple​

 

[MRK20]

Here's a senario...

It's 9:00pm and you're with your buddies and you guys decide to go to a local meet. If you(whoever is reading this) went to the meet (10-20 ppl) and YOU said "Yeah, twin-screw superchargers are better if you are serious about boosting. Root superchargers can't boost as much". Then someone says, "That's a bunch of crap, root s/c's actually are better for bigger boost". Then, everyone turns to you waiting for your response. What do you say after being called out so that you don't look like an idiot?



(I'm not saying anyone is wrong here...I'm still trying to find out the truth. No one take offense. PLUS, it's an intersting senario!)

 

[Highrev1]

Here read the 2 efficeny chats and make your own decision then.

http://www.opcon.se/www/files/lysholm/pdf/performance charts/diagram_lys1600ax.pdf

 

[nbilyue]

Yeah if anyone knows MRK20 it's the guys at Redshift. Greg, I do have one question though. I always thought for really big power numbers centrifugal made the best numbers. In my understanding though it wasn't the best option because it had all of the disadvantages of both a turbo and a supercharger. Any input?

 

[Highrev1]

Centrifugal will make the highest max hp number....with that said they are linear, as rpms build boost builds, so boost below the curve will be less than a positive displacment charger and in theory two cars roots at 6psi and Centrifugal at 6psi the the roots has a big advantage even if the centrifugal makes a higher max HP.

 

[nbilyue]

Yeah I knew it was something along those lines. Again thanks for great input.

 

[MRK20]

Yeah if anyone knows MRK20 it's the guys at Redshift.

^What the hell is that?^

 

[nbilyue]

I'm saying they know a whole lot about superchargers. They have done extensive resting because they are developing a supercharger kit. You can trust their answers. I have talked to Greg a few times and he is full of knowledge. He always pulls out random knowledge too. Like when I installed my cams he sent me a pic of the timing chain tensioner like 5 seconds after I brought it up. I'm not sure what he is doing over there haha, but he knows a whole lot.

 

[MRK20]

Haha...I must have read that wrong...

 

[nbilyue]

Yeah I didn't mean they know you, I meant they know superchargers. failing to use commas FTL haha.

 

[MRK20]

Yeah I didn't mean they know you, I meant they know superchargers. failing to use commas FTL haha.

I just thought it was a joke or something because I was asking "silly" questions. I just wanted a better explanation is all. I'll just research it more...