Dismiss Notice



Register Today It's free! This box and some ads will disappear once registered!

Will Be Blown Again!

Discussion in 'Modified 1995-2001 Explorers' started by Blown, December 14, 2017.

^^Searches ExplorerForum.com^^





  1. CDW6212R

    CDW6212R Hauls the mail. Elite Explorer

    Joined:
    June 17, 2004
    Messages:
    19,516
    Media:
    5
    Albums:
    1
    Likes Received:
    1,090
    Trophy Points:
    143
    City, State:
    Knoxville, TN
    Year, Model & Trim Level:
    98 Limited AWD
    Is that a good equation for the KB target blower speed/ratios? I hadn't seen the math in years, and I figured I would need just over a 3" pulley for mild boost. That looks like I'll be closer to a 3.5" pulley in the end, they don't go much bigger do they?
     
  2. Support EF

    Join the Elite Explorers for $20

    Explorer Forum has probably saved you that much already, and will continue to save you money as you learn how to diagnose fix problems yourself and learn which modifications work without having to experiment on your own. Elite Explorer members see practically no ads, can add their own profile photo, upload photo attachments in all forums, and Media Gallery, create more private Conversations, and more. Join Today. Your support is greatly appreciated.



  3. 77'cj7

    77'cj7 Member

    Joined:
    November 28, 2007
    Messages:
    68
    Likes Received:
    9
    Trophy Points:
    8
    City, State:
    Weston, WY
    Year, Model & Trim Level:
    98 ranger
    Should be about right. I was 8psi with 5.85 lower and 3” upper on my car. Thats a 2.1 though, not sure how the 2.2 compares.

    Is that snout support for a 302 or 351?

    Not thrilled to hear the 270mm drive is used on F150. In that case, I’ll be quite interested with how the drive mods turn out. Much of the difficulty is due to the shaft being hardened.
    Chris
     
  4. 77'cj7

    77'cj7 Member

    Joined:
    November 28, 2007
    Messages:
    68
    Likes Received:
    9
    Trophy Points:
    8
    City, State:
    Weston, WY
    Year, Model & Trim Level:
    98 ranger
    Equation has worked well on my thunderbird. Theres an efficiency factor not listed there, dependent on setup. Believe mine is in the .9-.95 range

    Pulleys go up to 4” on the 10mm 6rib. Hood clearance is the issue there.

    Chris
     
  5. 77'cj7

    77'cj7 Member

    Joined:
    November 28, 2007
    Messages:
    68
    Likes Received:
    9
    Trophy Points:
    8
    City, State:
    Weston, WY
    Year, Model & Trim Level:
    98 ranger
    From Cougar5.0 on corral:
    Formula has been within 1psi on my kenne bell and on the EE magnusson. Gives a very good idea of what to expect

    Chris
     
    Last edited: June 4, 2018
    • Like Like x 1
  6. CDW6212R

    CDW6212R Hauls the mail. Elite Explorer

    Joined:
    June 17, 2004
    Messages:
    19,516
    Media:
    5
    Albums:
    1
    Likes Received:
    1,090
    Trophy Points:
    143
    City, State:
    Knoxville, TN
    Year, Model & Trim Level:
    98 Limited AWD
    Okay good, so that should be close, with the efficiency adjustment of about .92. I'll be starting with a 6-rib pulley and changing to 8-rib with an engine swap and 7" crank pulley. I'll use the first combination to guess at the next pulley ratio, that should be very close. Thanks,
     
  7. Blown

    Blown Active Member

    Joined:
    December 6, 2007
    Messages:
    271
    Likes Received:
    81
    Trophy Points:
    38
    Year, Model & Trim Level:
    2000 X-Edge
    Thx for the addition of efficiancy to the formula....

    I ran my calc based on a 5.85" crank pulley, I think that's right though I posted 6".

    I got a 4 1/8" pulley I won't be using and a 2 1/4" I will save to blow it up!!!
     
  8. 77'cj7

    77'cj7 Member

    Joined:
    November 28, 2007
    Messages:
    68
    Likes Received:
    9
    Trophy Points:
    8
    City, State:
    Weston, WY
    Year, Model & Trim Level:
    98 ranger
    Actually 6.0” crank is correct for explorer 5.0. 5.85” is stock fox mustang. 6.5” is fox thunderbird and F-150.

    Yeah, those pulleys won’t help you much. I’ve never seen a 4 1/8, low boost with the 6.5 crank I guess.
    2 1/4 is more for KB 1.5 or just being stupid, lol.

    Chris
     
    Last edited: June 5, 2018
  9. Blown

    Blown Active Member

    Joined:
    December 6, 2007
    Messages:
    271
    Likes Received:
    81
    Trophy Points:
    38
    Year, Model & Trim Level:
    2000 X-Edge
    ahhhh, altitude is 5400' here.

    ((12.05 + 7lbs / 12.05) X 5.0 / 2)) / 2.1liter = 1.88:1

    Pulley ratio is 1.85, so a little under 7lbs boost!
     
  10. 77'cj7

    77'cj7 Member

    Joined:
    November 28, 2007
    Messages:
    68
    Likes Received:
    9
    Trophy Points:
    8
    City, State:
    Weston, WY
    Year, Model & Trim Level:
    98 ranger
    I think your boost will be higher. I’m at 3500 feet, and the formula works with the 14.7, not 12.9.
    Chris
     
  11. 77'cj7

    77'cj7 Member

    Joined:
    November 28, 2007
    Messages:
    68
    Likes Received:
    9
    Trophy Points:
    8
    City, State:
    Weston, WY
    Year, Model & Trim Level:
    98 ranger
    Well, I'm throwing in the towel on my attempt. I spent all afternoon and evening tearing the M-90 off my ranger and mocking up with the kenne bell setup. The lightning lower manifold just isn't going to work for my intentions.

    Issues:
    On my 97 motor, the fuel regulator is actually in the way of the blower casing itself, not to mention the inlet. I believe I might be able to swap in a set of 5.0 F-150 rails to fix this. The schrader valve is touching the discharge as well, but thats minor.
    There is no room to expand the inlet rearward as much as I'd like. Its pretty tight to the firewall.
    There is effectively no room to build a bypass setup. The explorer fuel rails block a good portion of the discharge manifold, so I don't see a way to plum the bypass without some goofy fab work.
    I just bought the lightning manifolds and a 270mm drive, so that was an expensive failure.

    Now for the good news, for the OP: Blown.
    Your 2000 explorer motor runs a returnless fuel system IIRC. That makes tuning harder, but should completely avoid the clearance issues I was running into.
    The inlet will clear the firewall. Its tight, and the main harness to the transmission is gonna be really snug, but it will work.
    Hood clearance is awesome. I was worried about the IAC motor, since it sticks way above the throttle body. Even with the TB level with the top of the compressor, theres at least an inch or more clearance above the IAC. The drive pulley had plenty of clearance as well.
    If you don't want to swap to a F-150 lower, I'll sell you this lightning discharge for half of what I paid. (I'm keeping the inlet to cut up for my build, it actually will work perfectly.) The GT-40 flows better, plus saves you the work of swapping a lower.
    It looks to me like shortening the drive will be the only significant work required for your build. The TB adapter should be easy.
    I was going to knock apart the drive today to see what would be required for shortening, but I have now realized I'm not pursuing this route, so I'm hoping I can return it. You're on your own for that part of the mockup.

    And the good news for me:
    The 2.2L Kenne Bell IS getting installed on my ranger.
    The explorer express discharge manifold setup can be modified relatively simply to work.
    A 141mm termi cobra drive will put the discharge of the kenne bell roughly lined up with the M-90's discharge, and give me plenty of space at the rear of the compressor to open up the inlet and add a bypass valve.
    The lightning inlet will be sectioned, and expanded 1" rearward to make it larger than the Flowzilla inlet on my car. The TB mount will be cut off, EGR provisions cut out and opening enlarged to 90mm, and reattached facing forward. Basically, I'm making an explorer Flowzilla manifold, even larger than the mustang version.
    There's just enough space behind the expanded inlet for a bypass valve to fit perfectly, no goofy u-bends required. Straight shot from inlet to outlet, with a 90* fitting added to the back of the inlet. Again, basically mustang Flowzilla setup.

    I took quite a few pics of the mockups and part comparisons, let me know what you want to see. I was really frustrated by the fuel rail clearance issues, so I actually didn't get any of the compressor on with the lightning lower. Let me know if it would help you and I can toss it back on tomorrow. For now the KB is sitting on the X-charger manifold.

    Thanks,
    Chris
     
  12. Blown

    Blown Active Member

    Joined:
    December 6, 2007
    Messages:
    271
    Likes Received:
    81
    Trophy Points:
    38
    Year, Model & Trim Level:
    2000 X-Edge
    I have been busy and had a little financial back step.

    I appreciate the information. Sorry it didn't work out for you.

    You have the adaptor that goes from a Lightning/Exploder lower intake to KB?
    I'd put my money toward what you don't need verses getting an F150 lower, fuel rails and who knows what else.................

    Please PM me what you got.
     
    Last edited: June 19, 2018
  13. 77'cj7

    77'cj7 Member

    Joined:
    November 28, 2007
    Messages:
    68
    Likes Received:
    9
    Trophy Points:
    8
    City, State:
    Weston, WY
    Year, Model & Trim Level:
    98 ranger
    PM sent.

    I was just rereading the thread and noticed youve been running the equations for a 2.1L compressor.
    What you’ve got isnt a 2.1. They have a completely different front cover. Thats an old opcon/autorotor compressor.

    That style could be 1.5L, 1.7L, 2.0L, or 2.2L. F150 kits were either 1.7 or 2.2.

    Check the serial number in the silver flange running around compressor behind front plate. It’ll be on the side. Believe I can see it in the pic in your first post, but not well enough to read it.

    OA3150 = 1.5L
    OA417 or MX417 = 1.7L
    OA420 or MX420 = 2.0L
    OA422 or MX422 = 2.2L

    For example, my compressor is MX422 xxxx. So its a 2.2L from the later MX generation.

    The 1.5, 2.0, and 2.2 all share the same case length. The 1.7 is shorter. The 1.5 and 1.7 have 6 bolts on discharge, the 2.0 and 2.2 have 5.

    There are a few kenne bell 1.7’s in the longer case, they briefly couldnt get 1.5’s for the mustang kits and modded some 1.7’s.

    There are also some OA418 1.8l compressors, but dont believe kenne bell ever used them.

    Chris
     
    Last edited: June 19, 2018
  14. Blown

    Blown Active Member

    Joined:
    December 6, 2007
    Messages:
    271
    Likes Received:
    81
    Trophy Points:
    38
    Year, Model & Trim Level:
    2000 X-Edge
    Yup thought it was a 2.1

    MX422 so it's a 2.2l

    Here's your 302 EFI lower manifolds, who know's them left to right?:
    [​IMG]
     
  15. boominXplorer

    boominXplorer Elite Ranger Elite Explorer

    Joined:
    September 16, 2002
    Messages:
    8,917
    Media:
    55
    Albums:
    3
    Likes Received:
    515
    Trophy Points:
    133
    City, State:
    Virginia Beach, Va
    Year, Model & Trim Level:
    00 4x4 Mounty
    Mustang, f150, explorer......... The F150 lower is a decent option. The upper sucks but obviously you won't need it.
     
  16. Dono

    Dono 347 V8 Limited turbo Elite Explorer

    Joined:
    February 18, 2009
    Messages:
    5,257
    Likes Received:
    524
    Trophy Points:
    133
    City, State:
    Winnipeg, Manitoba
    Year, Model & Trim Level:
    00 Limited V8
    I'm guessing for your application you will only need the lower intake.
    You would be fine with the F-150 intake...I didn't know that;s what it looked like. Nice factory piece.

    I'd love to see someone drop on a box R full intake so I'd know if it would fit under a stock hood. I hate my tfs trackheat just because it is so hard to get at the injectors etc without removing the upper intake. Although, the trackheat is probably a perfect fit for my application.
     
  17. 77'cj7

    77'cj7 Member

    Joined:
    November 28, 2007
    Messages:
    68
    Likes Received:
    9
    Trophy Points:
    8
    City, State:
    Weston, WY
    Year, Model & Trim Level:
    98 ranger
    My ranger has a ridiculous amount of hood clearance, I’m sure the ex hood is similar. A box r is tall for a mustang, but they have very little hood clearance.
    My mockup last weekend had the EE discharge bolted to the lower gt40, with the kenne bell sitting on top. I bolted the stock throttle body to the lightning inlet, just to see how far I’d have to lower the tb due to the IAC. I was quite surprised to find i still had over an inch of clearance over the IAC, with it completely above the compressor, and way off center passenger side. Lets see if i have a pic:
    [​IMG]

    A box r would probably fit with a ton of room to spare.

    Chris
     
    • Useful Useful x 1
  18. 77'cj7

    77'cj7 Member

    Joined:
    November 28, 2007
    Messages:
    68
    Likes Received:
    9
    Trophy Points:
    8
    City, State:
    Weston, WY
    Year, Model & Trim Level:
    98 ranger
    O yah, forgot I took some pics for you. Thats the dodge 185mm drive with dodge 7rib 3.25 pulley.
    However, the compressor is set up in that pic for alignment with a cobra 141mm drive. Within a mm or two anyway, best i could do with a straightedge and caliper. I just bought a 141mm drive with 10mm bolt from jon bond, so will take pics once I mockup with that. Ill make my own build thread and stop mucking up Blown’s now that i’m on a completely different path.

    Where compressor sits with 185mm drive:
    [​IMG]
    Half inch plywood due to clearance with fuel reg and eaton snout bracket

    Firewall clearance with 185mm drive:
    [​IMG]

    Compressor location with 141mm cobra drive:
    [​IMG]

    Firewall clearance with 141mm cobra drive:
    [​IMG]

    Drive comparison, 270mm sn95 and F150 to 185mm dodge:
    [​IMG]

    You can see why I decided to use the EE discharge and cobra snout. Everything lines up so much nicer, even though it costs me not being able to resell x-charger and wasting money for the lightning manifold. Kenne bell is being awesome with customer service and allowing me to return the 270mm drive I bought.

    Chris
     
    • Like Like x 2
  19. Blown

    Blown Active Member

    Joined:
    December 6, 2007
    Messages:
    271
    Likes Received:
    81
    Trophy Points:
    38
    Year, Model & Trim Level:
    2000 X-Edge
    The truck 302 lower manifold, looks pretty good to me since it will be under boost and likely no more than 8lbs. I like the large ports but they could hurt intake velocity on an NA engine, well at least compared to the long round GT40 intake ports.

    Thanks for the pics Chris, it's OK, very much related, but would also be good to see your build all together in a separate thread.
     
  20. 77'cj7

    77'cj7 Member

    Joined:
    November 28, 2007
    Messages:
    68
    Likes Received:
    9
    Trophy Points:
    8
    City, State:
    Weston, WY
    Year, Model & Trim Level:
    98 ranger
    I’ll snap some pics with the kenne bell discharge next time I’m home. I think firewall clearance is going to get very tight with a taller lower/ the compressor higher. The firewall kicks out as you can see in my pics.
    I’ll get some measurements from back of case as well, since yer inlet could be slightly different.

    Chris
     
  21. 77'cj7

    77'cj7 Member

    Joined:
    November 28, 2007
    Messages:
    68
    Likes Received:
    9
    Trophy Points:
    8
    City, State:
    Weston, WY
    Year, Model & Trim Level:
    98 ranger
    Got a few hours to work on my setup this weekend. Bolted the Lightning discharge to the compressor and took some pics showing where it ends up.

    Here's the compressor sitting on the lower intake without a spacer. Note that the rear corner of the compressor is actually sitting on the fuel pressure regulator and tilting the discharge off the lower. Newer trucks with a return-less fuel system shouldn't have this issue.
    [​IMG]

    Here's the compressor spaced up 1" off the lower intake. It clears the FPR, but the vacuum nipple would still hit the inlet manifold.
    [​IMG]

    Firewall Clearance with 1" spacer: Roughly 2.25 inches. Sorry for bad pic quality.
    [​IMG]

    Here's firewall clearance when spaced up 1.5". Exactly 2" of clearance from back of compressor.
    [​IMG]

    Spaced 1.5" with the inlet manifold in place:
    [​IMG]

    Clearance is non-existant. The inlet is touching the washer hose, the computer cover, and just barely clearing the trans dipstick. But it does fit. Obviously, i removed the wiring harness from the computer, and its tucked down below. To run this setup, you'd have to extend and reroute the harness as it comes vertically up the firewall from the engine.
    [​IMG]

    If the truck intake is more than 1.5" taller than the GT-40, you're going to be hitting the firewall. I don't think it should be that much taller, but something to consider.

    If I was going to run this setup, I would use a 1" spacer on the gt-40 and bend/trim the FPR vacuum port. 1" spacers are a standard part, and it would keep the inlet slightly off the firewall to avoid rubbing issues.

    Here's a couple of just for fun pics.

    Comparison of drive lengths, 141mm, 185mm, and 270mm.
    [​IMG]

    Compressor comparison, autorotor to kenne bell. Top is my autorotor 2.2L, bottom is my Kenne Bell 2.1L. The front covers are very different, making identification easy.
    [​IMG]

    Chris
     
    • Like Like x 1

Share This Page







We Support Our Troops!