Suto 6 Report post Posted December 14, 2019 It´s released !! https://www.komo-tec.com/en/detail/index/sArticle/685 Not cheap, but still wow ... wonder how drivable the package is. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
#84 13 Report post Posted December 14, 2019 I am pretty sure it is very drivable, unless you count for limitations in traction It is interesting that they chose to go for the TVS1740 supercharger, which according to official Eaton data sheets is less efficient than the TVS1900. I've however heard that they get better result with the TVS1740, so maybe it is Edelbrock who have made a better job with the flow paths than Harrop? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Mattmahope 167 Report post Posted January 9 On 14/12/2019 at 12:30, #84 said: I am pretty sure it is very drivable, unless you count for limitations in traction It is interesting that they chose to go for the TVS1740 supercharger, which according to official Eaton data sheets is less efficient than the TVS1900. I've however heard that they get better result with the TVS1740, so maybe it is Edelbrock who have made a better job with the flow paths than Harrop? Hi @#84, please could you kindly share a link to those official Eaton data sheets that you refer to? Thanks very much! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
#84 13 Report post Posted January 9 Yes, the general page is found here: https://www.eaton.com/us/en-us/products/engine-solutions/superchargers/tvs-overview.html And here you find the performance diagrams: https://www.eaton.com/us/en-us/catalog/engine-solutions/tvs-r1320.specifications.html Please be aware of the fact that these new diagrams (mass flow on x-axis) differs in various degree from the old ones (vol flow) which have been published on various Lotus forums in the past. I got this explanation: "the efficiency maps have been changed as Eaton has retested the rotating groups to a more accurate standard which has resulted in the change of maps ". Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Mattmahope 167 Report post Posted January 9 Thank you @#84! I must confess that I am struggling to understand what exactly those graphs show and how to read them, so any education would be very gratefully received. Essentially I would like to understand what the pros/cons of the 1320 vs 1740 vs 1900 superchargers are (assuming all would be charge cooled)? How do you determine what pulley size to run with each supercharger to operate at maximum efficiency? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
geartox 526 Report post Posted January 10 A cost for an upgrade from EX460 to EX490 ? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
W31SSN 81 Report post Posted January 10 The 1320 is a bit small to make much more power efficiently, without generating too much heat, the 1900 is more suited to 4.0l plus engines. The 1740 is basically the sweet spot, both in terms of operating efficiency window and packaging with a charge cooler. The EX490 kit uses the factory 430 Charger and cooler combined with proprietary intake and headers. Hoping to get mine installed in the coming months..... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
550superfast 438 Report post Posted January 11 12 hours ago, geartox said: A cost for an upgrade from EX460 to EX490 ? Quite a lot I would imagine as it is a new supercharger, cooler, intake manifold etc. It's more suited to 410 and 430 cars. Quote https://www.youtube.com/user/400superamerica Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Tex 179 Report post Posted January 11 59 minutes ago, 550superfast said: Quite a lot I would imagine as it is a new supercharger, cooler, intake manifold etc. It's more suited to 410 and 430 cars. The EX490 kit isn’t available for either the 410 or 430 due to Komotec’s inability to fully crack the later ECU’s, they only offer the EX475 1 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Mattmahope 167 Report post Posted January 12 On 10/01/2020 at 21:58, W31SSN said: The 1320 is a bit small to make much more power efficiently, without generating too much heat, the 1900 is more suited to 4.0l plus engines. The 1740 is basically the sweet spot, both in terms of operating efficiency window and packaging with a charge cooler. The EX490 kit uses the factory 430 Charger and cooler combined with proprietary intake and headers. Hoping to get mine installed in the coming months..... Hi @W31SSN, when you say “the 1900 is more suited to 4.0l plus engines”, why is that? I appreciate that this is what is says on the Eaton website, but what is the actual reason for that? As @#84 says above, the Eaton data sheet maps show that the TVS1900 is actually MORE efficient than the TVS1740, which also seems to be confirmed by SSC. Obviously more parasitic loss with a bigger charger, but that can be combatted with a larger pulley etc. Thanks Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
