free hit
counters
Harrop TVS1900 video - Page 2 - Engine & Ancillaries/Gearbox - The Lotus Forums #ForTheOwners Jump to content


Harrop TVS1900 video


Recommended Posts


Upgrade today to remove Google ads and support TLF.
12 hours ago, GFWilliams said:

My car was measured at 414.4 whp and a calculated 463.6PS at the crank, done on a similarly warm day in Mendig.

Whether the charge cooled 1900 is a competitor isn't really clear to me to be honest, and there are quite a few questions:

 - What exhaust system are they running?  It doesn't sound like a stock system to me. 

 - What air intake are they using?  Looks like a stock airbox on the 400hp car, which is very restrictive (open it and you'll see!)

 - Why is a TVS1900 required, when I can get 460hp with the standard TVS1320?  The TVS1320 is clearly capable up to the power I'm running, so what's the benefit of a TVS1900?  A new supercharger is quite a big cost when you can get to that power without having to replace it?

 - Komo-tec suggests that the limit of the gearbox is 460hp and around about 480nm. For their 500hp package, Komo-tec suggest changing the gearbox to a sequential unit.

 - If you have to change the manifolds, change the cat and change the airbox to get to decent power, from a cost point of view, surely you're best off doing it with a stock TVS1320?   If you want more power than 460hp, see point above... 

 - Does anyone know costs or what is actually included? 

That's exactly what I was thinking when watching the video - why replace the supercharger? Unless you are on track and temp is an issue,  I don't see the value. 

I think I'm likely to go -  2bular manifolds+tune or EX370 and 2bular manifolds. 

Just need to confirm with Jim if he has any plans for the intake side as I don't want that to be the bottleneck 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, BatMobile said:

Mark, what stopped you going for this option and made you definitively choose the kt route?  

I have messaged Jim to discuss it as a package, hoping that will be easier than spending 3 hours on the phone to him 😂

 

To be fair you can email KT/H111 and get virtually an instant response. U can email SSC and wait for your bus pass. Also, I can fit the full 2bular (which I have) and get a map. 

 H111 have been helpful, but its just the three (four in my case) week turnaround that making  me think of just driving to Mendig.

Also, if you look at the guys on this forum who really use their cars , ie lots of miles, track use, there hasn’t been a single problem with the install.

Something else that came up by the way was an Evora told running an Audi 8 speed, however I believe the 7 speed is preferred.

All this is just my opinion of course, pay your money take your chance. For me the TVS looks a great install but lots of ££££&’s for the dame result.

cheers

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The TVS uses a SSC developed air intake which is really top quality. For anyone based in the UK the best way to get information on this upgrade is to contact Hofmann's, as they are the sole distributer over here (don't know anything about the calibrated performance folks personally).

 

5 (2).JPG

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I dont have any 'inside info' regarding supercharged Lotus', but I'm sure Toyota / Lotus / Eaton / Harrop have huge data files of it. In particular Lotus have a long experience with forced induction drivetrains for their own cars & Engineering clients.  Without their hard data, its easier just to view actions of the OEMs. 

As confirmed in the video, Harrop originally engineered TVS 1320 to fit the 2GRFE at the request of Toyota Australia, to offer a response to fast Holdens & Fords in the local market.  Keeping it simple & economic, there was no inter cooling, the SC was small enough to fit under the standard bonnet, large enough to give a modest 5.5 psi boost pressure.  For a sporty Toyota, which was unlikely to incur sustained heavy use,  it was fit for purpose.

Like all manufacturers Lotus Cars do enough to meet their product goals, not more. Otherwise its Engineering spend that Sales & Marketing can't recover. So Lotus used the Harrop 1320, unchanged from the  original Toyota  set-up. For Lotus too, it was a quick fix, fit for purpose.

The Aisin transmissions that Lotus use with the 2GR-FE are rated to 400 NM / 295 lb ft, spookily thats what an Evora S / Exige S with the Harrop 1320 archives. The latest '430' powered cars have torque limited to  440 NM (450 NM Auto) even with the transmission internally uprated & externally cooled to cope.  Only when fitted with Xtrac sequential transmission, is torque allow to achieve 525 NM, factory built.

If Lotus Cars felt the TVS 1320 could achieve greater power goals, why would they add another supplier (Edelbrock), use their larger TVS 1650, housed in a new casting & add the complexity / weight / cost of charge cooling ? Add to these costs the global re-certification of the drivetrain. If Harrop felt the TVS 1320 could achieve greater power goals, why would they develop two Lotus dedicated TVS 1900 offers, with / without charge cooling ? Adding intercooler sandwich plate and using a smaller pulley to the TVS 1320 would have been much easier, but they didn't for a reason. 

Looking at other supercharger applications beyond the 2GR-FE, a 1320 sized SC is small for a 3.5 litre engine. The main Eaton web site does give data on the thermal efficiency on their different sized SCs and boost levels.   

My take from all this ? If you dont own the latest TVS 1650 factory built car,  the TVS 1320 has limited headroom, the TVS 1900 - ideally CC, is the way to go. However there with be knock-on effects - the integrated manifold/cats & the standard transmission won't take the higher boost for long, so you'll need to budget for this too. Also power = heat, so additional cooling will be a factor.

 

 

 

 

  





 

Edited by Cain-it
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Bravo73 said:

:secret:They’re not that restrictive (contrary to popular, ‘internet belief’). Lotus can obviously manage to get 430bhp using them...

Was exactly my though - why is it generally believed that intake and exhaust are restrictive... 🙄

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I didn’t think being restrictive was the issue, my understanding was that the oem cats are susceptible to dying in the manifold.

i know one tvs1900 owner who had this happen after install.

how much of a risk it really is or whether he was just unlucky is something best answered by someone with a better technical understanding.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, vd9 said:

Was exactly my though - why is it generally believed that intake and exhaust are restrictive... 🙄

Intake is restrictive and I can vouch for that with my own setup. I also saved a few KG ditching the OEM system.

I understand the ‘internet belief’ comments for sure all opinion ... 

For me personally I’m just thinking logically that an end to end solution is a better solution. 

That said let’s say you go down this route... then the cats blow... do you then upgrade the manifold and cats... get a remap but ask for it to be held back to ensure the power doesn’t increase to protect the engine and gearbox?

  • Like 1

www.alias23.com

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, vd9 said:

Was exactly my though - why is it generally believed that intake and exhaust are restrictive... 🙄

Drive one with a good set of manifolds, sports cat and a good, free flowing exhaust and you’ll be flabbergasted at how much more responsive the car is.  My old exhaust had 10hp more in loud mode than in the quiet mode and that’s just the back box.  You could clearly feel that difference when driving, and the quiet mode was still better than the standard exhaust.

To be honest, go look at the standard parts and the flow the gasses have to take.  You’d have to be a fool to think these aren’t restricting flow!

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm not quite sure that judging by the look and disregarding considerations on the volume of gasses, diameters of the pipes, relative pressures and temperatures fully makes for an even semi-scientific debate. :stuart:

Intake change resulting in better power output other things being equal in absolute majority of the cases is due to uncontrolled leaning out of the AFR. MAF is calibrated for estimation of the air flow created when using standard intake box, changing to straighted pipe makes the same amount of air flowing differently and be read differently. Few kilos of weight are mostly at the expense of some £££ (which OEMs normally are not keen on spending without a clear reason) and universal usability (OEMs must make the cars that can be used problem-free in a very wide range of temperature, humidity, altitude, etc.). I also agree that there is good gains to be made by making it run leaner (better through proper mapping) without materially impacting anything else. :thumbup:

Edited by vd9
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Gold FFM
On 02/11/2018 at 23:07, tim_marra said:

I've also heard that the KT430 is a 'dyno queen'

I'm probably being very thick here, so apologies, but what is a dyno queen?  I'm not a tuning expert or anything....

Alcohol. Sex. Tobacco. Drugs. Chocolate.  Meh! NOTHING in this world is as addictive as an Evora +0. It's not for babies!    

The first guy to ride a bull for fun, was a true hero. The second man to follow him was truly nuts!   

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Gold FFM

Ah, OK, got you. Thanks for that Tim.

So the implication is that the KT upgrades do not deliver, under normal use, the expected performance gains / power.  That's good to know as i was looking at the 460/475 kit for my 410 Evora.

As far as the manifolds and cats are concerned, I have no idea if the oem ones are restrictive or not. However, I did replace the headers and cats on my S1 NA with the 2bular headers and 200 cel sports cat and mated them to the Lotus sports exhaust the car left the factory with.  After being advised to drive easily for the first 500 miles, to let the ECU readjust to the new headers, with no other changes, I can confirm two things:

1. The engine temperature reading was ALWAYS one bar lower than it had ever been before - this confirms less heat in the engine bay and on the engine. Without getting into an argument on flow restrictions etc the one thing that I think everyone can agree on is that having those cats within centimetres of the engine block, essentially cooking it, is not good for consistent, long term performance delivery or possibly engine life.  But again I am not an expert

2. The car was much more responsive, noticeably so. it pulled stronger in the mid range in all gears, was noticeably quicker, and did not run out of that strong pull heading to the top of the rev range.  It did totally transform the car.

The upgrade was not cheap at £2.4k fully fitted, but to me it was worth it. oh and the icing on the cake, the noise. Oh my god did it improve the noise.

 

Anyway, sorry for the diversion, I'll let the willy waving between flows, dyno's, 1320 versus 1650 vs 1900 (though the bigger the number it has to be better surely!) and the merits of SCC, versus KT, versus H111 versus whomever. The one thing i do note is that on a lot of thread like this the views get entrenched in line with the decisions owners have taken and seldom do we get an owner decrying their choice, research and selection whilst pouring scorn on the choices of others. It's just human nature i guess.

I'm off to see if i can connect 64 Duracell AAA batteries in-line to my 410 to provide an extra 450bhp at the wheels.  According to my butt dyno, it will be faster!  :scared::driving::sofa:

Alcohol. Sex. Tobacco. Drugs. Chocolate.  Meh! NOTHING in this world is as addictive as an Evora +0. It's not for babies!    

The first guy to ride a bull for fun, was a true hero. The second man to follow him was truly nuts!   

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, C8RKH said:

So the implication is that the KT upgrades do not deliver, under normal use, the expected performance gains / power.  That's good to know as i was looking at the 460/475 kit for my 410 Evora.

I guess this is a massive generalisation. What the implication is is that EX430 may no tbe the best solution if you are after sustained high performance (think track use) and not just "willy waving" (using your terminology) or "b-road blasts" or "next to local pub 0-50mph sprint". Reason is fairly simple - no charge cooling combined with pushing the stock supercharger far leading to heat soak after prolonged active use

 

10 minutes ago, C8RKH said:

The engine temperature reading was ALWAYS one bar lower than it had ever been before - this confirms less heat in the engine bay and on the engine.

Engine coolant temperature when fully warmed is normally limited by the thermostat and stays at around 90C - making it consistently lower does not make anything good to the (not heavily modified) engine and is also not likely to be achieved.

 

15 minutes ago, C8RKH said:

The car was much more responsive, noticeably so. it pulled stronger in the mid range in all gears, was noticeably quicker

The only true measure of performance is metered acceleration in the otherwise equivalent conditions. Everything else is easily attributable to perceptions and influenced by the above mentioned noise (aren't noisier cars are on average faster? :zorro:) or any other changes.

Fully agree on, in general, tendency to rationalise own decisions. It is also natural, as supposedly each decision is made in line with the decision maker's research and considerations. So the decision maker would normally genuinely believe in the adequacy and correctness of the decision. 🙄

Link to comment
Share on other sites

52 minutes ago, tim_marra said:

Something that 'does the numbers' on a dyno run, but cannot replicate said performance on repeated runs or real world performance.

 

16 minutes ago, C8RKH said:

So the implication is that the KT upgrades do not deliver, under normal use, the expected performance gains / power.  That's good to know as i was looking at the 460/475 kit for my 410 Evora.

That's not really fair - any non-intercooled solution is going to heatsoak at some point, including the standard cars, and the TVS1900 conversions.

@C8RKH your car is chargecooled from the factory, so no problems there.  I drove a 460 upgraded Evora 400 last week, it's rapid!

Dave

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, tim_marra said:

Something that 'does the numbers' on a dyno run, but cannot replicate said performance on repeated runs or real world performance.

You're welcome to have a ride in my car, I guarantee you won't be saying it doesn't have real world performance :)

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Gold FFM
1 hour ago, vd9 said:

I guess this is a massive generalisation. What the implication is is that EX430 may no tbe the best solution if you are after sustained high performance (think track use) and not just "willy waving" (using your terminology) or "b-road blasts" or "next to local pub 0-50mph sprint". Reason is fairly simple - no charge cooling combined with pushing the stock supercharger far leading to heat soak after prolonged active use

I believe you could use the EX430 on my Evora Sport 410/or a 400 and that has a chargecooler from factory.

 

1 hour ago, vd9 said:

Engine coolant temperature when fully warmed is normally limited by the thermostat and stays at around 90C - making it consistently lower does not make anything good to the (not heavily modified) engine and is also not likely to be achieved.

That's interesting but the effect on MY Evora NA in real world was a cooler engine. I am technical enough to know why, just stating an observed fact

 

1 hour ago, Hangar 111 said:

That's not really fair - any non-intercooled solution is going to heatsoak at some point, including the standard cars, and the TVS1900 conversions.

@C8RKH your car is chargecooled from the factory, so no problems there.  I drove a 460 upgraded Evora 400 last week, it's rapid!

Dave, I never said I agreed with Tim or anything like that. I was drawing a conclusion based on his input. 

From what I have seen the KT upgrades are well engineered "packages" as opposed to a bit of this and that, mix and match, and I've not really heard any owners complain about the upgrades or workmanship etc. I've seen plenty of comments on TLF from those who don't have the upgrades questioning their figures, reliability, engineering etc. But that's a different thing.  i've also seen what other owners have done (like @Bravo73 and @Bruss ) to their cars and believe they have been well researched, well executed upgrades that have transformed their cars. So I have a lot of respect for their views too as they have put their blood, sweat and money into the upgrades they have made.

I don't have an axe to grind here as I've not invested in one solution or the other etc.  However, i do try to deal in (or at least understand) facts (apart from when it is usually very apparent I am taking the piss / having a wind-up) which is why I ask sometimes the daft questions I do as normally you start to uncover that what you are getting are not facts, but hearsay, recycled internet comment, peoples own views etc and not hard evidence.

Anyway, fact - my NA with 2bular headers and sports cat WAS more responsive than before. Fact 2 - my NA engine was running cooler without the two OEM cats frying the engine block.  If you want confirmation of the latter go for a spin with @Kimbers who is now lovingly looking after that little beauty.

Alcohol. Sex. Tobacco. Drugs. Chocolate.  Meh! NOTHING in this world is as addictive as an Evora +0. It's not for babies!    

The first guy to ride a bull for fun, was a true hero. The second man to follow him was truly nuts!   

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hey folks, a couple of clarifications from me

I was only referring to the KT430 and not the charged cooled versions.

My post was a tad tongue in cheek, which I should have made clearer. That, and the fact I have zero data to back up the claim. And yes, I am biased, as I chose the TVS1900 route. Which is epic. I may have mentioned that elsewhere though :yes: :driving:

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, C8RKH said:

 

Anyway, fact - my NA with 2bular headers and sports cat WAS more responsive than before. Fact 2 - my NA engine was running cooler without the two OEM cats frying the engine block.  If you want confirmation of the latter go for a spin with @Kimbers who is now lovingly looking after that little beauty.

More than happy to get baby out for a spin. She's feeling really neglected at present as not been uncovered for 2 weeks due to my work commitments.

I personally can't speak for anything other than the fact that I have driven both a normal NA and my car back to back and she is DEFINATELY more responsive. Not sure of the HP increase but felt faster and quicker to pick up. Not noticed the cooler engine but not something I normally look for anyway.

Possibly save your life. Check out this website.
http://everyman-campaign.org/

 

Distributor for 'Every Male' grooming products. (Discounts for any TLF members hairier than I am!)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, vd9 said:

I'm not quite sure that judging by the look and disregarding considerations on the volume of gasses, diameters of the pipes, relative pressures and temperatures fully makes for an even semi-scientific debate. :stuart:

Intake change resulting in better power output other things being equal in absolute majority of the cases is due to uncontrolled leaning out of the AFR. MAF is calibrated for estimation of the air flow created when using standard intake box, changing to straighted pipe makes the same amount of air flowing differently and be read differently. Few kilos of weight are mostly at the expense of some £££ (which OEMs normally are not keen on spending without a clear reason) and universal usability (OEMs must make the cars that can be used problem-free in a very wide range of temperature, humidity, altitude, etc.). I also agree that there is good gains to be made by making it run leaner (better through proper mapping) without materially impacting anything else. :thumbup:

Admittedly different engine - but I had the precats on a Toyota 1zzfe - I removed them as they were notoriously problematic and continually fragmented and destroyed engines. The difference in performance was noticeable - and verified at the time with a racelogic. That was on a weedy 1.8litre. On a supercharged V6 I would think the gains would be even more significant. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...