Supercharged k10?

J

JStone

Ex. Club Member
Anyone done it? I know turbos have been done, but has no one supercharged? Was thinking about sticking an Eaton M45 (off a Cooper S) on my K10 as an inlet manifold charger (rather than a carb charger) as a summer project (if I ever have any cash to play with!). If there's a cheaper option (say a charger off an old jap car or something?) I'd go for that, but I know I'd have to build a brand new inlet manifold to fit it.

Edit: God damn, excuse my foolishness. There's a couple of threads about this already. Delete and what not if you feel it's needed. I'd still like to know of other charger options to the Eaton though!
 
I looked at doing this - changed my plan to a cg13 convertion.

Contrary to what some people told me, the Eaton turns the correct way. Best bet according to my research is to use an SU carb. There (were) are Eaton to SU adapters available on ebay.

You should have a spare lower pully?

UNPROVEN - It looked like the SC would not fit on top of the inlet manifold due to the brake stuff. I was considering using the SC on the bottom of a custom inlet manifold.

Decided a cg13 conversion was a better use of the money.
 
Was considering a post carb supercharger, as that means I can slap on almost any carb I want (If I understand it right). So if I were to slap something together, It'd probably be webbers or bike carbs. That'd work, right? In terms of money, a Supercharger is less gain than a CG13 conversion, but is cheaper and less work. When combined with new carbs and a decent exhaust, should see a decent increase.
 
In terms of money, a Supercharger is less gain than a CG13 conversion, but is cheaper and less work.
Click to expand...

As a statement of fact that is dubious at best. The reason I went for the CG13 conversion was because I fully disagree with that statement.

Yes certainly post carb is best. Yes you can then use any carb. I suggested the SU carb because I found it to be the best carb for the job. It is sidedraft & the adapter to mate it to the eaton is 'easy' to purchase. Some of the original mini supercharger kits mate the SU to the Eaton. If you want to use twin webbers, you will likely have to have parts fabricated, and may struggle with space.
 
richj said:
As a statement of fact that is dubious at best. The reason I went for the CG13 conversion was because I fully disagree with that statement.
Click to expand...
Well for me, a CG13 conversion isn't possible. A supercharger, new manifolds and a new carb? Yeah. That's better for my situation. Thanks for the SU carb tip though. :)
 
its definatly not cheaper and in theory the cg13 conversion is easy (as far as conversions go anyway) to do however this HAS NOT been prooven yet to my knowledge.
 
daveeeeee said:
its definatly not cheaper and in theory the cg13 conversion is easy (as far as conversions go anyway) to do
Click to expand...
Well...Say around £100ish, new inlet manifold to cater to the charger with post carb build depends on how I get it made (self made, sent off to my dads machine shop or made by a professional) and SU carbs for £50+...Exhaust system would cost a bit more, but there you go. To me, that's a lot easier than a conversion. I'm sure it depends on your situation.
however this HAS NOT been prooven yet to my knowledge.
Click to expand...
Supercharging or Conversion? o_O
 
neither have been proven.

Don't see how your get a full exhaust system for £100 and a large enough su you wuld be looking at closer to £100 i would say. Going to keep the head and internals standard is another thing to think about and I hav'nt seen a turbo conversion done on a k10 here.

Lastly yeah its all possibe but doesn't mean your get any positive gains but worth trying if you want, Thought about what presure your be running the charger at??
 
People say things havn't been proven but how do they know?

I'm not sure I understand your numbers, the charger £100, the inlet manifold dads workshop rates £50? The SU carbs and adapter £70? The pulley £30? Getting the carbs tuned £50? The belt £10?

How about the framework to bold the SC to the engine? £50?

And then the the compression ratio? Do you think the standard fuel pump will be able to service a SC? What are you going to do about the timing?
 
how about twin webers £350? lol sometimes i think its best to just stick to basics with these sort of cars, theres a reason its not been tried before and thats because there are easier alternatives that will give just as decent gains as with most old cars its pretty simple to achieve relative power gaines by sticking a bigger carb on and a 4-2-1, the engine is limited by the gearbox and clutch anyway so why bother and power within that limit is easily acheivable so why bother? do you see my point?
 
Honestly do some research to understand how stuff works before making things appear so simple. BTW having the supercharger after the carbs is a nasty way to do it.
 
Me I think:
Yes certainly post carb is best.
Click to expand...

Whilst its true that pre carb gives much better gains (better atomization), its also harder to do (more custom parts). The mini s/c kit I looked at was post carb. In the s/c conversion on the cheap context, post carb is surely better?
 
richj said:
People say things havn't been proven but how do they know?
Click to expand...

Ok neither hve been proven to the best of my knowledge on this site.

Right since theres other threads on the site i sudgest you read them. Other chargers your be looking at at least £400.

Don't understand what everyones obsession with ultra cheap tuning, yeah its possible but you have to b prepared to put your own research, trial and error and work into it. Taken me months to gather parts to my N/A tune up all together and its still not finished due to minor setbacks.
 
Having looked around a bit and read the other threads on here, it's become horribly obvious that it'd be a larger task than the mini cooper lads in this area made out. They judged around £175ish max, for all the parts for a suck through system. It's just that alluring whine of the supercharger, one day I want one. :p Still...Interesting to see if anyone's done it before. :)
 
hey

i have seen this done before but heres my idea (my idea friends wallet) when my mate gets out of uni he wants a sleeper car and he loves micra's i have a super s and he loves it so hes thinking of getting one and then running a superturbo engine (apart from head) running forged pistons ect (id be building the damn thing) and superturbo gearbox or other needs more research and running it as a 1.2 superturbo in the super s shape (he prefers super s and the super turbo is a unique taste.

i wanted to run a simalar thing on my super s super turbo inlet manifold and supercharger with compression plate
 
Be better and faster to get a sti and bolt on standard panels! The st block is all forged and seriously strong, not sure the 1.2 could take the presure. Although would love the st gearbox on my n/a 1.2. would love a lsd!
 
Hey

no you cant destroy a super turbo like that but if the engines about on a crashed one i doubt it would be that much faster. 1.2 should be find with forged pistons ect the extra cc would give it a real boost any way would be to much work either.
it would be like me putting an evo engine in my 323 gtr the 323 engine is stronger anyway and you dont wanna kill a historic rally car. but i would fit a gt4 box when i get some cash. any who

2 year time ill be doing this so ill be doing the math now checking out ideal airflow through the engine heat dispersion ect
 
still think your get more power out of the original st engine, its designed for very high boosting and thats every single part! forged crank, pistons, conrods....everything!
 
It's pointless trying to get that much power into a micra. All that power on a FWD car is no good.

If you're gunna charge it you may as well make it RWD too.
 
ollyc98 said:
It's pointless trying to get that much power into a micra. All that power on a FWD car is no good.

If you're gunna charge it you may as well make it RWD too.
Click to expand...

Olly have you ever driven a FWD car with more than 150-200bhp? Countless cars have more than that these days. Please dont post unless you actually know what your talking about.
 
Can we list some, vauxhall vxr's, fiat 500 (sport model), seat cupras, vw gti's, toyota starlet glanza, nissan march turbo, sti, figaro.......bit of n endless list i give in, ll th above can come turbo standard yet most weigh more than the k10.

Have no problem if anyone wants to try super charging a micra engine but i personaly consider a centrifugal super charger because of there normaly small size and low boosting think the micra will respond very well to it.
The caterham 500s uses a Rotex centrifugal charger and is an absolute animal kicking out over 330bhp out of a 2.3 duratec lump.
 
lol do people put stupid aggressive comments. well i got to work out the porting ect for the extra boost how much volume in the cylinders needed what temp of air is ideal how much fuel is ideal alot of things to work out. Make the engine more efficient that will increases the spooling times ect ideal curve on power(damn maths I hate it), as for traction suspension set up all the way right tyres and alignment. Therese a rally metro 6r4 running silly power in the rallies I marshal at and 205 with a v8 space frame with like 400+ bhp so don’t be silly i knwo what im talking about.
 
If you cut out the text chat may i could be bothered to pay attention to what your saying!

I understand how you get more power out of increased displacement but you have to consider the MA series of engines, there not in metros or 205's.
The sti engine is designed for very high boosting, the ma12 is not. You can take the MA09 to higher levels of power than the 1.2 for this reason.

Welcome to prove me wrong.
 
Spooling times for a supercharger? o_O

Edit: It's been said before that the 1l's are better for turbo/supercharging than 1.2l's due to engine designs...or something.
 
Do you lot make this stuff up? The ST engine is practically identical to the MA10/MA12, how many have compared side by side and taken measurements? I can tell you /I/ have. Your all making guess work trying to complicate things when not necessary.

I am going to be picky here as it seems people are saying stuff just to look clever. But I have to highlight this as its just not making sense.

i got to work out the porting ect for the extra boost
Click to expand...
Why? The 1.2 head has exactly the same ports as the ST head.

how much volume in the cylinders needed
Click to expand...
I presume you mean combustion chamber to lower the comp ratio? If so you need to state so.

what temp of air is ideal
Click to expand...
your kidding? You don't need to calculate this. You can tell just by looking at a design if it will be ok or not.

how much fuel is ideal
Click to expand...
You don't need to calculate this either. This is the same for all boosted engines.

Make the engine more efficient that will increases the spooling times ect ideal curve on power(damn maths I hate it),
Click to expand...
You have almost no control over that. And you definately don't need to resort to maths to try and calculate it. The amount of data you /don't/ have and is beyond your control would make it pointless.

as for traction suspension set up all the way right tyres and alignment. Therese a rally metro 6r4 running silly power in the rallies I marshal at and 205 with a v8 space frame with like 400+ bhp so don’t be silly i knwo what im talking about.
Click to expand...
Ok...
 
JStone said:
Spooling times for a supercharger? o_O
Click to expand...

Bit vague, "normaly" quicker than a turbo but too many factors to give spooling times, try searching google but theres a lot of incorrect information.

In reply to Ed's all I'm trying to say is that the ma09 is designed to take very high boosting as proven by you. I'm not confident the 1.2 can take much forced induction even after decreasing the compression ratio and the sti engine would be best for a mild sleeper.

Although full Evo engine and drive train wins hands down for a sleeper! :D
 
Side Note:

this is not a dig...just trying to clear a missunderstanding...

ad4m1 said:
Make the engine more efficient that will increases the spooling times
Click to expand...

Generally...

'increases spooling times' to me means 'make the spoolong times bigger or longer' (worse)

Surely you meant "more efficient engine would 'decrease' spooling times"
ie make the spoolong times smaller or shorter' (better)
 
lol this has bin a crazy chat yes to sammo sorry if i confused u:)

first things first im looking to swap the engine in my micra soon as mate don’t want it now. I was looking at the conversions and whats the best one as this engine is ok but I am getting a few weird buzz noises not had a chance to look.
So im preparing for the worst sounds like bottom end. Not to worried but hey gotta make a back up plan. Any help on this would be great like price on engines witch ones to choose figro or march r ect i would like to run a supercharger on a 1.2 head attached to a presser sensor on the peddle so only kicks in when at 80% throttle save some fuel:)

here comes the other bit
even if the ports are the same u still need to check everything is as efficient as possible polish port job on some cars will do a ####ing lot its the ports are restrictive.
tdi managed to get a is 200 to 220 bhp turboed running 0.35 bar with the work they did other companies who dont do there maths had to boost it up to 0.6 creating more stress on the engine, there builds went bang with in a year. this one is still running please tell me why do you think this is they all used the same kit and fitting and all dynoed at same power before the kit.
it also using the katana intercooler managed to incress spooling by 32% over hks, greddy, apexi.

Basically I am working on guess work atm but one thing im not sure your right about, you have control over every thing in your engine math is involved every were ask any major race engine builder such as tdi.
They make some of the best and more efficient engines in the country at lest. Spooling times are determined by much air and the presser, going to the inlet manifold passing through intercooler and piping. Then how much effort the engine has to spin the turbine on the hot side of the turbo.
The more drag involved in this presses the longer the spool times. This can go into more depth but im lazzy
also the more you know about temps into combustion chamber as you were the more you know they type of burn urll be getting, length and type of burn, type of spark plug you will need octane of fuel also can change this. get this rong and urll have pinking or pre ignition load of diffrent problems

fuel volume isnt the same for all engines your telling me my mazda 323 gtr runnign 550 cc injectors uprated fuel pump is the same as what would be needed for a march r i think not its determind by how much is needed before and arfter boost this is also ushally tweaked in the ecu or upgraded injectors you only need the extra fuel on how much air is going in hence the air fuel ratio.
as for the 1.2 supercharged there no replacment for displacmnet ushally higher liter even if its a lil bit higher more toqrue That’s my 50 pence worth
 

Similar threads

S
Supercharged
Replies
11
Views
2K
sexyjonah
S
F
Bobbys Eaton M45 Supercharged Proton Satria
Replies
9
Views
4K
Satriagti7
S
A
Supercharging?
Replies
23
Views
3K
k11_998
k11_998
C
FS Supercharged Micra with all the goodies.
2
Replies
63
Views
1K
CMF_Radiolite22
C
Fordy
k10 ecc boost sensor question
Replies
10
Views
1K
SammoHung
SammoHung
Back
Top