JKOwners Forum banner

1 - 20 of 36 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,798 Posts
Is anyone familiar with this? I've been searching for any kind of review for months with no luck.
http://www.boostedtech.com/superchargers/jeep-wrangler/2007-2011-wrangler-4-0-liter-3-8-liter-v6-supercharger/

@ALASHA knows more about most s/c systems than most, maybe he can chip in.
My own feeling on these guys is they can't properly do a dyno run, and knowingly post anomalous data. The complaints I see on the web are mostly tune related. I ran an Eaton m90 from Avenger, still think it was a great system. There was a tuner (Jeremy) from Revolutions Performance also at [email protected]. He had some good JK tunes, dunno if he is still doing this.

Sorry, not a directly relevant response. Hope it helps.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
8,302 Posts
This is the biggest pile of shit I have seen in a very long time. This is obviously an attempt at providing the cheapest piece of crap you could buy and it shows. Here is the list of crap wrong with this thing:

Non intercooled.
M62 instead of at least m90 - small blower equals less volume and hotter air compared to a larger blower at same boost
7th injector and FTC tuning is like 2007 era technology in the JK world. Guys dont know what they are doing to say the least.
dyno graph - WTF???? really shows they dont have a clue

If you want to drop over 3K to get nominal performance gains and more than likely reduce engine longevity drastically, then this is you kit.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,146 Posts
Listen to the man.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,755 Posts
This is the biggest pile of shit I have seen in a very long time. This is obviously an attempt at providing the cheapest piece of crap you could buy and it shows. Here is the list of crap wrong with this thing:

Non intercooled.
M62 instead of at least m90 - small blower equals less volume and hotter air compared to a larger blower at same boost
7th injector and FTC tuning is like 2007 era technology in the JK world. Guys dont know what they are doing to say the least.
dyno graph - WTF???? really shows they dont have a clue

If you want to drop over 3K to get nominal performance gains and more than likely reduce engine longevity drastically, then this is you kit.
^^This.....don't do it....or at least I wouldn't
 

·
Random Dude
Joined
·
3,039 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
39 Posts
Just some basics-

The Chrysler ECUs have been very difficult to crack and be able to reprogram. When installing 6 bigger injectors, 2 bar MAP sensors, forced induction the ECU needs to be reprogrammed. Many have tried like Diablosport, Hypertech and others. There have been many failures when trying this route. Years ago most, before we were easily able to reprogram ECUs, all the forced induction manufactures had to use 'Old School' technologies like the auxiliary injector to add the extra fuel required under boost. Whipple, TRD, Jackson, Ripp to name a few, all used auxiliary injectors to solve their fueling needs.

The Chrysler 3.8L V6 is just an 'Old Technolory' engine. Designed in the 80s and built inthe 90s thru 2011 in the Jeep JK. Pushrod, low compression, poor flowing heads and manifolds. Originally designed for the Minivan. That's the truth. Failed attempts to use 6 bigger injectors and ECU reprogramming required different solutions. Many complaints have been the 'tuning' of most all of the 3.8L forced induction kits.

To add about 100HP requires more fuel, about 60 lbs/hr more fuel. So instead of adding 6 bigger injectors and not being able to reprogram the ECU with any success, using the 7th injector was a reasonable solution. By using a single 60 lb/hr 7th injector all the fuel needed under boost could be supplied. Controlling this additional injector is basically a stand alone controller. The Split Second FTC1 controls this extra injector and ignition timing during boost. Chrysler spent thousands of hours an millions of dollars programming their ECUs. Cold start, idle, cruise, emissions. SO don't mess with and change this. It works perfect out of boost. Only in boost does the FTC1 turn on and pulses the extra injector and retard the timing, both of which are required during boost. The FTC1 'piggybacks' into the stock ECUs wires/connecotrs and takes some signals and intercepts the crank and cam sensor signals to do this. It is easily and fully programmable for the fuel and timing retard in tables by boost and rpm. A clean and simple solution to a difficult problem. Also 6 bigger injectors costs about $250 more than 1 single 60lb/hr injector.

Then instead of injecting the extra fuel needed during boost with 6 bigger injectors right into the head and valve/combustion chamber, The 7th injector Injects the fuel INTO the supercharger inlet and adds the additional benefit of COOLING the charge intake air temperatures. The fuel acts as a 'Chemical/Liquid' intercooler reducing the charge intake air temps by 50-80 degrees. No heat soaking. Try and do that with a front mount air to air or top mound 2" thick water to air intercooler.

New superchargers cost between $2000 to $2500. Tomorrow they are used superchargers. By re-purposing the GM Eaton superchargers for a different application saves money. Millions of these superchargers were built by Eaton for GM. They have run over 100,000 miles with minimal maintenance and million of miles collectively. By modifying the housing, these supercharger can be made to fit different applications, like the Jeeps 4.0, 3.8 and 3.6 engines. They are ideal superchargers for Jeeps. They build boost early just off idle and build Torque. Just what the Jeeps need. No having to rev it out to build boost like centrifugal superchargers require. And they are cheap. Easily rebuildable and last nearly forever. A New SC will add $2000 to kits cost.

M62 vs M90. It is best to use an appropriately sized supercharger for the intended application. For low reving Jeep engines keeping a supercharger in it's efficiency range is most important. A faster spinning M62 is more efficient than a slower spinning M90. Air temps are about the same with either supercharger compressing to 5-6psi. The M62 takes less power to spin than the M90. For a low reving, low boost 4.0 or 3.8L engine the M62 is a perfect fit.

The 3.8L engine is 232CI. It 'ingests' 232 CI of air for each engine cycle. Each engine cycle is 2 revolutions. So for 1 revolution, the engine ingests 116 CI of air. The M62 SC puts out 62 CI of air per revolution. By using a 2.5" SC pulley and the 6.375" crank pulley achieves a 2.6:1 step up. 6 psi of boost requires about 37.5% more air, so the 3.8L 116CI + 37.5% = 160CI of air. Spinning the M62 SC 2.6 times the crank revolution will put out 62 x 2.6 = 161 CI of air. Just exactly what the 3.8L Jeep engine requires to make 6 pounds of boost. The SC will be turning at maximum 5000 engine rpm, 13,000rpm which is under the maximum recommended constant speed and is right in it's most efficient zone. It really is the perfect size supercharger for a low reving low boost application like the JK 3.8L. For a higher reving engine or requiring more boost, then the M62 is too small.

The M90 would require a 1.77:1 step up to put out the same 160 CI of air for 6 pounds of boost. This requires a 3.5" SC pulley and the SC will operate at a maximum engine 5000 rpm of 8,850 SC rpm and lower during lower engine rpms. This is well BELOW it's efficiency zone. It will put out less boost and requires MORE power to spin. For the Jeep JK 3.8L this is just too big for this low rpm, low boost application.

Cheaper, low cost is all relative. Using a rebuilt sub $500 supercharger is cheaper than a new $2500 SC. The SC kits could be easily $2000 more expensive with a Brand New SC that is a used SC tomorrow. Savings include- Repurposing used/rebuilt M62/M90 SC -$2000, 5 less bigger injectors -$250, No intercooler (it does have a liquid/chemical intercooler) -$1200
Total savings is $3450 compared to others.

I hope that clears up some general misconceptions. Education is needed to make informed decisions. Only take feedback from someone who uses and has experience with a product.
Happy boosting.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
8,302 Posts
I would be happy to clarify any misconceptions.
This isn’t a misconception. This is a fact. Ripp did piggy back tuning with a 7th injector back in 07 until Diablo started supporting reflashing of the JK ecu.


Years ago most, before we were easily able to reprogram ECUs, all the forced induction manufactures had to use 'Old School' technologies like the auxiliary injector to add the extra fuel required under boost. Whipple, TRD, Jackson, Ripp to name a few, all used auxiliary injectors to solve their fueling needs.
Keyword is old school. Just because it was done doesn’t mean it’s the best solution. Just like we moved from carburetors to fuel injection so did all of the aftermarket companies you mentioned as well as just about every major reputable performance company in existence today transitioned to full reflashes.
Reprogramming the computer is exponentially better than trying to lie to it. Today’s ECUs can adjust based on input so they will in effect negate what your piggy back does to a certain degree.
Furthermore, adding a supercharger completely changes the air flow characteristics across the board, not just under load conditions further supporting the idea that a reflash is the right way to do it.

The Chrysler ECUs have been very difficult to crack and be able to reprogram. When installing 6 bigger injectors, 2 bar MAP sensors, forced induction the ECU needs to be reprogrammed. Many have tried like Diablosport, Hypertech and others. There have been many failures when trying this route. ……
Failed attempts to use 6 bigger injectors and ECU reprogramming required different solutions. Many complaints have been the 'tuning' of most all of the 3.8L forced induction kits.
You word your statement like Diablosport failed in relfashing JK ECUs. They have quirks and suck as a company but they certainly didn’t fail. You can successfully tune a JK ECU to handle larger injectors, a different map sensor and forced induction. Just takes a skilled tuner. I have the first relfashed and supercharged JK in the country and have been running strong and without issue for the last 7+ years.


Then instead of injecting the extra fuel needed during boost with 6 bigger injectors right into the head and valve/combustion chamber, The 7th injector Injects the fuel INTO the supercharger inlet and adds the additional benefit of COOLING the charge intake air temperatures. The fuel acts as a 'Chemical/Liquid' intercooler reducing the charge intake air temps by 50-80 degrees. No heat soaking. Try and do that with a front mount air to air or top mound 2" thick water to air intercooler.
That 7th injector is not cooling when you are in a non boost situation like crawling or partial throttle driving where you are still under vacuum but that supercharger is still adding heat to the system. Furthermore, a 7tgh injector doesn’t guarantee even distribution of supplemental fuel across all 6 cyclinders. You can create a lean condition in one cylinder while causing a rich condition in another. Ill take my chances with a water to air intercooler…

M62 vs M90. It is best to use an appropriately sized supercharger for the intended application. For low reving Jeep engines keeping a supercharger in it's efficiency range is most important. A faster spinning M62 is more efficient than a slower spinning M90. Air temps are about the same with either supercharger compressing to 5-6psi. The M62 takes less power to spin than the M90. For a low reving, low boost 4.0 or 3.8L engine the M62 is a perfect fit.

The 3.8L engine is 232CI. It 'ingests' 232 CI of air for each engine cycle. Each engine cycle is 2 revolutions. So for 1 revolution, the engine ingests 116 CI of air. The M62 SC puts out 62 CI of air per revolution. By using a 2.5" SC pulley and the 6.375" crank pulley achieves a 2.6:1 step up. 6 psi of boost requires about 37.5% more air, so the 3.8L 116CI + 37.5% = 160CI of air. Spinning the M62 SC 2.6 times the crank revolution will put out 62 x 2.6 = 161 CI of air. Just exactly what the 3.8L Jeep engine requires to make 6 pounds of boost. The SC will be turning at maximum 5000 engine rpm, 13,000rpm which is under the maximum recommended constant speed and is right in it's most efficient zone. It really is the perfect size supercharger for a low reving low boost application like the JK 3.8L. For a higher reving engine or requiring more boost, then the M62 is too small.

The M90 would require a 1.77:1 step up to put out the same 160 CI of air for 6 pounds of boost. This requires a 3.5" SC pulley and the SC will operate at a maximum engine 5000 rpm of 8,850 SC rpm and lower during lower engine rpms. This is well BELOW it's efficiency zone. It will put out less boost and requires MORE power to spin. For the Jeep JK 3.8L this is just too big for this low rpm, low boost application.
When one tries to size a supercharger or turbo for an application, they will refer to a compressor map to determine the best fit. Garrett does an excellent write up on this process (https://www.garrettmotion.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/06/Turbo-Tech-103.pdf) but Eaton provides their maps in cubic meters of flow per hour compared to Garrett’s pounds per minute so I had to resort to this write up to get a good basis (How to Size a Custom Supercharger | eHow)

You can use either write up to determine that you will be around 7-8 psi of boost at redline (~5800 rpm) which is ~1.5 pressure ratio.
Next up, assume the stock 200 hp number from the factory is accurate and expecting a 50% increase from a supercharger is fair so our target is 300hp. Based on my dyno graphs, I was making peak torque at around 3550 rpm so that gives us our rpm range and I assumed .9 VE at 3550 and .8 VE at 5800. These are assumptions and are probably a bit high for what the old 3.8 really does but still gives us a good guesstimate of where we need to be.
If you follow along the second write up with the numbers I provided and do some conversion to cubic meters per hour, you should get about 544 and 790 cubic meters per hour at 3550 and 5800 rpm respectively.

We now have enough information to look at the respective compressor maps to get an idea of where we are at. Both maps are posted below.
Starting with M62, with 544 as the x axis and 1.5 as the y axis, we are probably in the 62 adiabatic efficiency circle. The higher that number, the cooler the incoming air. At 790 you are damn near off the graph which means you are essentially outside the blower’s usable range.
Looking at the M90, you are at 60 and 58 adiabatic efficiency respectively. Well within the efficient operating window of that blower and we are spinning the blower quite a bit less (green dotted lines represent supercharger rpm).

So what have we learned here? Yes the M62 is cooler at that lower rpm as you mentioned but only by about 3% and it falls flat on its face as you rev the motor. The M90 has a lot more potential and is better situated to handle the entire rpm range.

In case anyone is wondering, 7-8 psi peak is about what I saw on my stock kit and I actually got 55% increase in HP so real world numbers line up fairly well with the math. Also the M62 is designed for 2.5-4.0L engines while the M90 can accomidate 3-5L engines (Fifth Generation Superchargers) further supporting the fact that the M90 is the better choice for the application.


Only take feedback from someone who uses and has experience with a product.
You got that right…





Bonus for anyone that cares, look at the map for the TVS1320 and look how sweet it is
 

·
Random Dude
Joined
·
3,039 Posts
This isn’t a misconception . . .






<drops science on CobraMarty, drops the mic>​






You got that right…





Bonus for anyone that cares, look at the map for the TVS1320 and look how sweet it is
Hey ALASHA,

Thanks for taking the time to post all that. I learned something :beer:

But . . . pix no workee :dunno: - any chance you could attach 'em?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,798 Posts
Anyone buying anything from Cobramarty deserves what little they get. Product is weak, website is weak, sales pitch is weak. I'd trust Ripp long before this.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
682 Posts
you know one of the best things about hanging out on Jeep sites, they are a lot like motorcycle sites. folks here are not afraid to call you out or bust your fucking bubble if you're trying to sell crap.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
39 Posts
Internet educated 'know it alls' who can just regurgitate what they have read online. Go with it.
When you have any actual experience with a BT supercharger kit, We can talk. Until then you just don't know.

Good luck and best wishes Jeep'in.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
702 Posts
Internet educated 'know it alls' who can just regurgitate what they have read online. Go with it.
When you have any actual experience with a BT supercharger kit, We can talk. Until then you just don't know.

Good luck and best wishes Jeep'in.
First of all, purchase a yellow star. Second, the whole point of this forum is discussion. So if this is the best you can come back with then I wish you luck.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
39 Posts
Discussion Yes, outright attacks No. It is what it is.

I have been turbo and supercharging cars for over 40 years. I own 9 Jeeps- 2 are '85 turbodiesels, 3 are supercharged, 2 built forged motors 4.1 an 4.2L.
Also a Turbo Mini, a supercharged F150, Excursion TurboDiesel, Truck TurboDiesel, and numerous other cars, over 20 total.
None are stock, all have been modified.

So my son and I live and breath cars, engines, turbo and superchargers.
Just saying.
Now go out and wheel and get your Jeeps dirty. No pavement pounders here.
 
1 - 20 of 36 Posts
Top