Saturn Sky Forum banner

21 - 40 of 557 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,055 Posts
Ok Guys and Gals if you remember back in Janurary I was talking about changing the gear ratio in our trany's and getting ready to build my car to be the first Saturn Sky to go 200MPH.
http://www.skyroadster.com/forums/f2/has-anybody-tried-changing-gears-transmission-49578/

Well its time to start.
Now that I've bought a new Lysholm/Whipple 1.6 supercharger its time to start the build thread.
Yes I am still working in Texas going back and forth so it will start slow but hoping to have everything done within the next 6-7 months. Other then DDM Dave helping with some motor and trany work its all my labor and money going into the project. Its not like, here Dave take my 10K and do what you can, type of thing. I do all my own work. I wanted to start with the T56 trany but now that I got the new S/C I'll start with that first. Here's some pictures of the new unit. I am not going to take it apart because its brand new but here are some pictures of how the twin screws are made. :thumbs:
TWINCHARGE! gives you the low end s/c grunt and take off with the high end hp of a turbo! this seems like a great s/c to do this with. the one ddm currently uses wont work because it sits where the turbo would go, but this twin screw, if im not mistaken, will replace the intake manifold.

id love to see a twincharge setup on the lnf! :D
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
11,230 Posts
Please video tape all attempts. I have a feeling one of them is going to be epic, just not sure what the cause of Epic-ness will be yet.
:jester:
X2! What's the old saying, pictures (vids in this case) or it didn't happen? LOL

TWINCHARGE! gives you the low end s/c grunt and take off with the high end hp of a turbo! this seems like a great s/c to do this with. the one ddm currently uses wont work because it sits where the turbo would go, but this twin screw, if im not mistaken, will replace the intake manifold.

id love to see a twincharge setup on the lnf! :D
Oohhhh...never thought of that...that would rock but be very complex. I know similar builds have been done just would be interesting to see it done like this. Actually, doing it with the M62 would might be better since twin screws really move a ton of volume and have more parasitic drag than the roots.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,199 Posts
Would a top like this help with drag? I've done 147mph in it already. When I had the soft top at that speed I would get a loud vibration. With this top so far I don't.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,333 Posts
I wonder if it would be better driving with the top down at that speed :eek:

-GT
No, far less aerodynamic. The coupe is the best way to go.
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
11,230 Posts
Would a top like this help with drag? I've done 147mph in it already. When I had the soft top at that speed I would get a loud vibration. With this top so far I don't.
The teardrop shape of that roof should help with the boundary layer of air remaining in contact with the surface of the car for a longer period of time thus reducing the amount of pressure drag experianced by the car (and thus a reduction of the overall drag coeffiecent of the car).

The design of the convertable top, with the flying buttresses and flat rear window between them, really is the worst case scenario as seen by the published CdAs. Whether or not this top would produce better numbers than the coupe would only be determined in a wind tunnel but it should almost certainly produce substantially better numbers than the convertable top.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,333 Posts
My response had nothing to do with the coupe top, it answered the question of whether the convertible top down (a worst case) was more aerodynamic than top up.

The coupe design is more aerodynamic than the convertible with the top up. I assume that the top shown in the picture above IS basically a coupe top on a vert or a coupe?
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
11,230 Posts
My response had nothing to do with the coupe top, it answered the question of whether the convertible top down (a worst case) was more aerodynamic than top up.

The coupe design is more aerodynamic than the convertible with the top up. I assume that the top shown in the picture above IS basically a coupe top on a vert or a coupe?
Yea, I got a little over clicky. LOL Post fixed. The top shown, I believe, is an aftermarket fastback style top for the Sky.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,199 Posts
Yes, it's Norms Full Hardtop. Anchored in at 3 points in the car. The only thing I would say would not be aerodynamic on the hardtop are where the door windows meets the B pillar(if that's what it's called). In the morning I had some dew in that area and after a run someone where I can see how the wind plays with the water on the top. Looks like the wind abruptly hits that pillar and shoots outward causing a marginal parachute effect. Other than that on the rest of the top the dew simply and somewhat uniformly moves towards the rear of the car to the bill. Wind tunnel, like everyone here is talking about is a must. Also, doesn't the cars rear facia produce a parachute affect? Even Norms facia does as well.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,874 Posts
I see Mr. 40rty beat me to it:

Yea, I got a little over clicky. LOL Post fixed. The top shown, I believe, is an aftermarket fastback style top for the Sky.
The top shown is from Norm's Fiberglass and is patterned on the Solstice Coupe top. modified to fit the convertible window shape, and further modified to fit the Sky body shape in the rear.

http://normsfiberglass.com/sky.html

.
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
11,230 Posts
Also, doesn't the cars rear facia produce a parachute affect? Even Norms facia does as well.
I'm sure it does...as do most rear bumpers. This is why often times at the track you'll see cars with holes in their rear bumpers or little flaps that can swing freely...allows air pressure buildup behind the bumper to escape. With a proper difuser and undercarrage this wouldn't be an issue. (Look at the bottom of a le Mans car...)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,055 Posts
Oohhhh...never thought of that...that would rock but be very complex. I know similar builds have been done just would be interesting to see it done like this. Actually, doing it with the M62 would might be better since twin screws really move a ton of volume and have more parasitic drag than the roots.
mechanically/physically i dont think itll be complex, the tuning and fueling will be the hard part.

i think the m62 is too small because it wont be a good low end buffer for the turbo. he needs to make LOTS of power which means a big slow spooling turbo and i feel like the m62 doesnt make enough power soon enough to bridge the gap.

the m62 came on the old ion redline and cobalt ss/sc and you couldnt break 300whp, in fwd cars, with them without a tiny pully and lots of cooling mods to compensate for the scorching air it was pushing in the motor. everybody upgraded to a lysholm or whatever to go past 300whp.

i dont know for sure though but hopefully when i become a mechanical engineer i can learn this stuff. :)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,874 Posts
Question: How fast did our 2jz friend from Canada go in his Solstice? Seems like he was over 160 on an old runway. (I really want to say he was more like 180...186 sticks in my mind actually, but it's been a few years and I didn't want to exaggerate the number.)

If the link is still good, it will be buried in his build thread on the Sol side.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
480 Posts
Yes, it's Norms Full Hardtop. Anchored in at 3 points in the car. The only thing I would say would not be aerodynamic on the hardtop are where the door windows meets the B pillar(if that's what it's called). In the morning I had some dew in that area and after a run someone where I can see how the wind plays with the water on the top. Looks like the wind abruptly hits that pillar and shoots outward causing a marginal parachute effect. Other than that on the rest of the top the dew simply and somewhat uniformly moves towards the rear of the car to the bill. Wind tunnel, like everyone here is talking about is a must. Also, doesn't the cars rear facia produce a parachute affect? Even Norms facia does as well.
The stuff that's available is for looks mostly. I have the front splitter and the rear fascia and would bet my house that neither one was designed with anything remotely close to this in mind. They may even be counterproductive for all I know. People get big money at the concept stage to work this stuff out. At the concept stage! What are we building and what are we building it to do. The rest hangs on this last sentence. It is not engineered in as an after thought. Everything works with everything else. If it doesn't right from the outset this is a train wreck waiting to happen or in the best case a empty pit to toss money. If you don't care but want to just have the fun of trying go for it but just like anything else the danger/engineering curve versus speed for something like this is not linear it jumps quickly and keeps getting steeper as the speed goes up.I am pissing on parades but I read so many threads about chasing WHP and Torque and top speed etc etc - we own Kappas that were engineered to be safe within the guidelines of concept plan.There is a reason that cars in this top speed range are well into the 6 figures to buy..IMHO...Everyone can beat me up now!!!
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
11,230 Posts
mechanically/physically i dont think itll be complex, the tuning and fueling will be the hard part.

i think the m62 is too small because it wont be a good low end buffer for the turbo. he needs to make LOTS of power which means a big slow spooling turbo and i feel like the m62 doesnt make enough power soon enough to bridge the gap.

the m62 came on the old ion redline and cobalt ss/sc and you couldnt break 300whp, in fwd cars, with them without a tiny pully and lots of cooling mods to compensate for the scorching air it was pushing in the motor. everybody upgraded to a lysholm or whatever to go past 300whp.

i dont know for sure though but hopefully when i become a mechanical engineer i can learn this stuff. :)
True. I had a roommate that had an Ion RedLine and I remember them being hard pressed to get much past 300 whp without meth and IC upgrades. I'm thinking more of a balance between parasitic drag from the SC and the need to keep boost low at launch to maintain traction.

This is why I say to get it right might prove difficult. I am invisioning a type of butterfly valve if you will where the Supercharger boost is only being used as the boost level of the turbo is below the boost level of the SC. The Twin Screw blowers are nice. The great thing is switching over to a twin screw from a roots is a night and day difference on top end. The M90 of my Grand Prix is like the M62. At about half track, you could feel power levels fall flat at the M90 was just not able to continue to feed enough air for the engine's higher RPM. With the 2.3L Whipple, you could feel that acceleration level you get down low continue through the entire powerband. Maybe it was just the displacement of the blower (the 2.3L Whipple could be used for the V8 Cobra Mustangs to replace the M110 blowers they came with) but it was a big difference on our V6s. He may not need to go twincharged with that SC.

The stuff that's available is for looks mostly. I have the front splitter and the rear fascia and would bet my house that neither one was designed with anything remotely close to this in mind. They may even be counterproductive for all I know. People get big money at the concept stage to work this stuff out. At the concept stage! What are we building and what are we building it to do. The rest hangs on this last sentence. It is not engineered in as an after thought. Everything works with everything else. If it doesn't right from the outset this is a train wreck waiting to happen or in the best case a empty pit to toss money. If you don't care but want to just have the fun of trying go for it but just like anything else the danger/engineering curve versus speed for something like this is not linear it jumps quickly and keeps getting steeper as the speed goes up.I am pissing on parades but I read so many threads about chasing WHP and Torque and top speed etc etc - we own Kappas that were engineered to be safe within the guidelines of concept plan.There is a reason that cars in this top speed range are well into the 6 figures to buy..IMHO...Everyone can beat me up now!!!
You're absolutely right. What the OP is trying to do pushes the design of this vehicle well beyond what the engineers at GM intended. The further you push that envelope, the more dangerous and expensive it gets. In the end though, isn't the car, by it's very nature, the definition of pushing something beyond it's design parameters and creating a more dangerous situation because of it? Flight, space travel, sailing...same thing. For whatever reason it seems to be in our DNA to push ourselves beyond what nature, or eningeers, intended.

The hardtop for the Sky will definately improve it's aerodynamics. Will it fail at over 200 mph? Doubtful. But the physics of it leads one to believe it SHOULD be a subtatial improvement over the stock cloth top.

Found the post for the 2jz Solstice. BTW, it's a vert. No hardtop. 309 kph = 192 mph. OK, I was a little low with the 186. :lol:

Pontiac Solstice Forum - View Single Post - 2JZ Solstice Swap
1. Daymn!

2. If the OP can match that setup I bet he can crack 200 with just chaning out the soft top for the hard top.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
1,811 Posts
Discussion Starter #38

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,199 Posts
The stuff that's available is for looks mostly. I have the front splitter and the rear fascia and would bet my house that neither one was designed with anything remotely close to this in mind. They may even be counterproductive for all I know. People get big money at the concept stage to work this stuff out. At the concept stage! What are we building and what are we building it to do. The rest hangs on this last sentence. It is not engineered in as an after thought. Everything works with everything else. If it doesn't right from the outset this is a train wreck waiting to happen or in the best case a empty pit to toss money. If you don't care but want to just have the fun of trying go for it but just like anything else the danger/engineering curve versus speed for something like this is not linear it jumps quickly and keeps getting steeper as the speed goes up.I am pissing on parades but I read so many threads about chasing WHP and Torque and top speed etc etc - we own Kappas that were engineered to be safe within the guidelines of concept plan.There is a reason that cars in this top speed range are well into the 6 figures to buy..IMHO...Everyone can beat me up now!!!
I very much agree that it's all for looks I just hope you could redirect that towards the op. He's the one doing this not me. I don't care for top speed or 200mph.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
945 Posts
Our stock transmission is topped out at 167mph. Now if he had a T56 like I'll be going to they calculate out to 201mph at 6100rpms. 192 is not possible with the stock transmission.
You're trying to solve this issue backwards, first get the power that pantherqs has then worry about everything else. You'll never hit 200mph with that supercharger that you bought, might as well send it back and buy a turbo that has a compressor wheel as big as a grapefruit.
 
21 - 40 of 557 Posts
Top