4kq supercharge/80q

[edkellock at juno.com]

I have been to this shop, met Brandon, and driven
his 80q s/c.  First impression was Wow!  Instant
low end pull, right off idle.  Why?  Because the s/c
is part of the intake tract.  As I understand, most
superchargers are before the throttle body as in
most/all turbo installations and therefore also
suffer from some spool-up, although less than
a turbo system.  Let me try to phrase things...

The s/c itself is a dual spiral design with one spiral
being of different specification than the other in the
same way that gears in a transmission have a 
different number of teeth from one another.

In the case of the 2.3 with it's specific manifold,  it
is modified so that the s/c is between the throttle
body and the manifold.  This means that as long as
the engine is running, the s/c is producing boost.

There is no variable control of this boost, instead 
there is a bypass which routes intake air past the
s/c thereby nullifying it's input at idle and off-throttle.
The bypass is at least a couple inches in diameter and
is controlled by a valve of some sort.

With as little as I know about the fabrication of these
types of parts, I'd say it looked pretty decent.  But
take that with a large grain of salt.  

On his 80q, he used a 1.3 litre s/c which he says is
larger than should ordinarily be used on that size engine,
but was used because he has other plans for the future.
With a "correctly sized" s/c, the power would probably 
be down from what I felt.  He is using some form of
water injection to help accomodate the larger s/c.
He has also employed one or two (can't remember
which) extra injectors, downstream of the s/c I believe.
These are from a 200 20v I think.  Not sure if these
extra injectors, water or gas, would be used with a
smaller s/c.

For comparison purposes, he suggested the use of
the same 1.3 litre s/c on my V8.  That's 3.6 litres
of engine displacement instead of 2.3.  

Some have expressed concern over the solidity of 
the business itself and it's business practices in the
past due to the company reemerging with a different
name selling basically the same service.  I can't speak
to that.  I can say that I've visited the shop twice, there
were cars in progress there both times, different ones,
and I have met the main guy (Mr. Rimmer?).  He
seemed geniune.  I got no bad vibe.  One of the cars 
in there on one visit was an A6 2.8 fwd auto.  The parts
being made for that were being made in duplicate to 
supply Gary Allison from Ronal for his A4.  Haven't
heard how that worked out.  

Other vehicles seen there were a Toyota RAV4, a 
Jeep Cherokee 6-cyl, a Hyundai (I think, might have
been a Daewoo), and a Subaru Impreza, owned by a
guy who lives near me, although we've never spoken.
I did share the road with him once while I was driving
the Coupe GT.  Even at 8500 feet, he was effectively
squirting past traffic, in small groups and in a very 
rational manner (meaning: with more restraint than I
might have used).  So at least I know that it's still 
running.

I would think that adapting an NG manifold to an earlier
engine would be more trouble and cost than fab'ing the 
parts needed for the non-NG engines.  He could certainly
expand his sales base _much_ more by doing so.  

Ed
Woodland Park, CO

On Fri, 15 Sep 2000 13:08:09 -0700 "Ken Keith" <auditude at neta.com>
writes:
> Seems like they could do it with the stock 4kq intake as well.  It is 
> a full custom job anyway.  Wasn't that the website talking about 
> skilled use of a bandsaw and tig welder?  I was looking at alot of 
> supercharger stuff last night, so I may have it confused with 
> another one.
> 
> Aren't there potential issues with the intake for the later models 
> holding the injectors, and the earlier ones were in the head.
> 
> Perhaps that's a blessing, since you could setup and additional set 
> of injectors in tandem with the CIS ones, to help fuel the extra boost.
> 
> I am becoming quite impressed with that Opcon Autorotor s/c tho'.  
> Seems to have a forte' in low rpm torque, compared to some of the 
> other designs.  I had thought centrifugal was the way to go.
> 
> Later,
> 
> Ken
> 
> "Doug Hill" <badoug at hotmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > I contacted the person in charge at Rimmer when this post came up
came up a 
> > while ago. The person that I spoke with is the owner of the Audi 80
and he 
> > said that to fit the kit to a 4000 all that he would need differant
is an 
> > intake manifod from the 80 (the two piece) and the cost would be
about $3000 
> > (good deal if any one has a spare 3 grand around)
> > Doug Hill
> > 87 4k cs quattro
> > BTW they are in Colorado Springs, CO for anyone who is wondering
> > >
> > >I responded to a couple of you guys and gave you a bad web address
> > >the web page i wuz discussing is actually
> > >http://www.rimmersuperchargers.com/
> > >they have a reasonable setup if you don't mind spending $3100.00
> > >
> > >you guys take a peek and let me know what you think...
> > >sorrry bout the website mixup...
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.audifans.com/pipermail/quattro/attachments/20000915/8e0863a6/attachment.htm