Ford Mustang Forums banner

1 - 16 of 16 Posts

·
Indo-Canuck-Yankee
Joined
·
2,736 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
Spoke to Kenne Bell this morning about the liquid cooling modification service they offer for their superchargers. They told me that my 2.2L unit is too old for this modification and it can only be done to the 2.8 and larger supercharger units. With that having been confirmed, I'm looking to design a DIY liquid cooling system for the supercharger oil, myself. My supercharger has a couple of 1/8" NPT plugs on the front oil reservoir/cover. One of them is topside and the other is bottom-side. The bottom-side plug is used as a drain, while the topside one may be useful as an oil feed? I'm thinking that mounting a small fluid cooler (such as this) and an electric inline fuel pump, perhaps even a Holley red or black pump, along with an oil filter (while I'm at it) may result in some heat reduction.

Thoughts?
 

Attachments

·
Twin Screw
Joined
·
1,198 Posts
Spoke to Kenne Bell this morning about the liquid cooling modification service they offer for their superchargers. They told me that my 2.2L unit is too old for this modification and it can only be done to the 2.8 and larger supercharger units. With that having been confirmed, I'm looking to design a DIY liquid cooling system for the supercharger oil, myself. My supercharger has a couple of 1/8" NPT plugs on the front oil reservoir/cover. One of them is topside and the other is bottom-side. The bottom-side plug is used as a drain, while the topside one may be useful as an oil feed? I'm thinking that mounting a small fluid cooler (such as this) and an electric inline fuel pump, perhaps even a Holley red or black pump, along with an oil filter (while I'm at it) may result in some heat reduction.

Thoughts?
I also looked into this. Here is the problem. The case only holds 6-8oz of fluid. Would be a chore to setup a cooler with lines and a cooler and get the right pump that would keep the supercharger case oil at the correct level. Then your adding another thing in the system to fail, a pump. The cooler on the case is a good mod for a 2.8 which is typically a higher boost setup.

You can go air to air. But that includes alot of piping. About the only method that works is methanol injection. I know your trying to work the kinks out of it. My advice stick to it and when you get your temps down to a resonable level you will feel alot better about how hot the system is getting then vs now.

To know where you stand you need a k thermocouple. The 3/8 npt type gm sensors solid and open dont respond or measure accuratly. I had a solid temp sensor on mine before I bought the conversion kit for my gauge to k thermocouple. It hardly moves 8-10 degrees either way on the solid sensor. When you get the injection setup properly and are monitoring it you will see tops no more than 160 iat. Lower under boost on methanol. So an oil type cooler isnt needed. If you need help getting yours dialed in and got questions just ask. Take care hop that helps a bit.
 

·
Indo-Canuck-Yankee
Joined
·
2,736 Posts
Discussion Starter #3
If I were recirculating oil through a cooler I was thinking that I would probably have to remark the dipstick with the pump running in order to maintain the proper level. Levels at rest with no circulation would undoubtedly be higher. It certainly is a lot of work, but I would bet that the heat reduction would be reasonably good. Right now, I see oil temperatures around 180*F on a warm day, so not too bad anyway.

Are you suggesting that I replace my ACT sensor with a higher quality thermocouple instead? From what it looks like, the stock ACT sensor appears to be a J or K type thermocouple as it is. The location of course, is in the runner, which I think is an accurate location.
 

·
Twin Screw
Joined
·
1,198 Posts
If I were recirculating oil through a cooler I was thinking that I would probably have to remark the dipstick with the pump running in order to maintain the proper level. Levels at rest with no circulation would undoubtedly be higher. It certainly is a lot of work, but I would bet that the heat reduction would be reasonably good. Right now, I see oil temperatures around 180*F on a warm day, so not too bad anyway.

Are you suggesting that I replace my ACT sensor with a higher quality thermocouple instead? From what it looks like, the stock ACT sensor appears to be a J or K type thermocouple as it is. The location of course, is in the runner, which I think is an accurate location.
No not replacing it, but adding it on another gauge for accurate readings. You might think by that sensor your seeing 190° for example, but in reality its a lot colder.The factory sensor is not made for that type of operation. Its made for an NA type stock engine. This is a really wet environment. They dont respond fast enough ir accurate enough compared to a K thermocouple. Here is a pic of the one I use.

EGT Probe Exhaust Gas Temperature Sensor - 3/16" Diameter
If you do the oil cooler you would have to have a big enough cooler to keep some sort of extra capacity. Then you have to think of voltage. You set the pump up at idle voltage say and it flows x amount of gph or what ever measurement it does. Then the car revs to redline the voltage increases pumping to much in or out of the case.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
2,363 Posts
All it takes is just a little to much oil in the S/C and it will blow the oil out the vent in the snout when the S/C rpm's go up, like at higher engine rpm's. Makes quite a mess.
 

·
Indo-Canuck-Yankee
Joined
·
2,736 Posts
Discussion Starter #6 (Edited)
Here's my solution to the oil vent on the snout issue. Kenne Bell was useless in helping me out. According to their tech docs, they state that they sent out an orifice, tube, and catch can for all customers that had an issue with the oil vent, free of charge. Not the case for me. This cost me about $35, so not too bad anyway. It consists of 8 inches of black 1/4" polyurethane tubing, an 1/8" NPT male to 1/4" tube festo pushlock fitting on the snout, a Coilhose Pneumatics MF2 filter/catch can, another fitting for 1/4" tube on that, and an oil tank vent on the other side of it.

Regarding the ACT sensor, why not replace the existing ACT sensor with a better quality and performing unit? I'm out of ports... one is dedicated to the bypass valve, the other is dedicated to the FPR, and the other is teed to supply reference to the MAP sensor driving the water injection and then also the boost gauge. The transfer function for the ACT is fully programmable within the EEC, conveniently, so it wouldn't be difficult to replace.

Also, have you seen these dual intake temp gauges from Glow Shift?
 

Attachments

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
2,363 Posts
Run the right about of oil in the S/C and the vent is a non issue. I have overspun my KB 2.8 with no issues with venting oil. The S/C is rated for about 18,000 blower rpm, I have spun mine over 24,000 rpm without an oil vent issue.

Just for fun, here is the inside of the case.



 

·
Twin Screw
Joined
·
1,198 Posts
Run the right about of oil in the S/C and the vent is a non issue. I have overspun my KB 2.8 with no issues with venting oil. The S/C is rated for about 18,000 blower rpm, I have spun mine over 24,000 rpm without an oil vent issue.

Just for fun, here is the inside of the case.



Saleen is correct. If you run to much oil it will spill out.
 

·
Twin Screw
Joined
·
1,198 Posts
Here's my solution to the oil vent on the snout issue. Kenne Bell was useless in helping me out. According to their tech docs, they state that they sent out an orifice, tube, and catch can for all customers that had an issue with the oil vent, free of charge. Not the case for me. This cost me about $35, so not too bad anyway. It consists of 8 inches of black 1/4" polyurethane tubing, an 1/8" NPT male to 1/4" tube festo pushlock fitting on the snout, a Coilhose Pneumatics MF2 filter/catch can, another fitting for 1/4" tube on that, and an oil tank vent on the other side of it.

Regarding the ACT sensor, why not replace the existing ACT sensor with a better quality and performing unit? I'm out of ports... one is dedicated to the bypass valve, the other is dedicated to the FPR, and the other is teed to supply reference to the MAP sensor driving the water injection and then also the boost gauge. The transfer function for the ACT is fully programmable within the EEC, conveniently, so it wouldn't be difficult to replace.

Also, have you seen these dual intake temp gauges from Glow Shift?
If your ecu takes a k thermocouple then I would add it. I took vacume off the front and put it to a vacume log. Use that for boost sensor and frees up a port for a thermocouple. Ill post a pic later
 

·
Indo-Canuck-Yankee
Joined
·
2,736 Posts
Discussion Starter #10 (Edited)
I'm not sure that the thermocouple is the right choice for the ACT sensor. Read this: https://www.ametherm.com/blog/thermistors/temperature-sensors-thermistors-vs-thermocouples

I do appreciate the insight, though, as it inspired me to investigate it further. There are other types of thermocouples that are more well suited, but they're a lot more expensive. I think we have one in our lab at work. I'll try to dig it up and post the specs on it. Here it is... it's called an RTD: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Resistance_thermometer

Regarding the oil venting issue, the later model superchargers like the 2.8 don't have the oil venting issue because they redesigned the vent. The new vent doubles as the pulley bolt, is larger than the old style supercharger pulley bolt, and the centrifugal action of the bolt forces oil off of the bolt, preventing it from seeping out and simply functions as a vent. This new style pulley bolt is not retrofitable to our earlier models, so a catch can is what Kenne Bell was apparently shipping to customers that had the issue.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
2,363 Posts
Regarding the oil venting issue, the later model superchargers like the 2.8 don't have the oil venting issue because they redesigned the vent. The new vent doubles as the pulley bolt, is larger than the old style supercharger pulley bolt, and the centrifugal action of the bolt forces oil off of the bolt, preventing it from seeping out and simply functions as a vent. This new style pulley bolt is not retrofitable to our earlier models, so a catch can is what Kenne Bell was apparently shipping to customers that had the issue.
True...unless you put an early snout on a 2.8L S/C. This is a snout off a 1.5L KB and has been shortened to fit my application. I put a small K&N air filter where the original vent "filter" was. I spin this S/C hard and do not have oil venting issues.



This gives you an idea of how much was removed in length.



one of the many blue prints of the redesign.

 

·
Twin Screw
Joined
·
1,198 Posts
I'm not sure that the thermocouple is the right choice for the ACT sensor. Read this: https://www.ametherm.com/blog/thermistors/temperature-sensors-thermistors-vs-thermocouples

I do appreciate the insight, though, as it inspired me to investigate it further. There are other types of thermocouples that are more well suited, but they're a lot more expensive. I think we have one in our lab at work. I'll try to dig it up and post the specs on it. Here it is... it's called an RTD: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Resistance_thermometer

Regarding the oil venting issue, the later model superchargers like the 2.8 don't have the oil venting issue because they redesigned the vent. The new vent doubles as the pulley bolt, is larger than the old style supercharger pulley bolt, and the centrifugal action of the bolt forces oil off of the bolt, preventing it from seeping out and simply functions as a vent. This new style pulley bolt is not retrofitable to our earlier models, so a catch can is what Kenne Bell was apparently shipping to customers that had the issue.
I read that article. Can comprehend most of it. But it doesnt address the issue of installed in a wet environment. Something you will see in using water meth. Ive had both on the same gauge. The k thermocouple is faster and more accurate by far.The article talks thermocouples but there are different thermocouples. K thermocouples will live in extreme temps. So asking it live in 200° max temps I assume the life is extended ten fold. You really have to see back to back how they operate in the same environment.

On mine in regards to the vent. I have the 2.1H. It has the vented bolt. On the snout. Is this what you are refering too? Mine seeps very very little. Go a whole year of driving and never add any fluid.
 

·
Indo-Canuck-Yankee
Joined
·
2,736 Posts
Discussion Starter #13
I read that article. Can comprehend most of it. But it doesnt address the issue of installed in a wet environment. Something you will see in using water meth. Ive had both on the same gauge. The k thermocouple is faster and more accurate by far.The article talks thermocouples but there are different thermocouples. K thermocouples will live in extreme temps. So asking it live in 200° max temps I assume the life is extended ten fold. You really have to see back to back how they operate in the same environment.

On mine in regards to the vent. I have the 2.1H. It has the vented bolt. On the snout. Is this what you are refering too? Mine seeps very very little. Go a whole year of driving and never add any fluid.
If I were to replace my existing ACT sensor I would simply replace it with an RTD like this one. These are much more accurate than a thermocouple and exhibit much less drift over time than either thermocouples or thermistors. Unfortunately, they're expensive. You could use a thermocouple and replace your ACT sensor by using a specific thermocouple sensing chip like this. Then you could output a voltage range from 0 to 5V and update the transfer function in the EEC.

I have the older blower, the MX422, 2.2L Blowzilla. It has the vent mounted on top of the end of the blower snout. I fixed that problem by adding a simple catch can as described in the photo I posted earlier. Spinning the unit for 14.5 psi, it blows a bit of oil out the stock venting system at high engine RPM.
 

·
Indo-Canuck-Yankee
Joined
·
2,736 Posts
Discussion Starter #15
1 - 16 of 16 Posts
Top