# Intercooler on a Neuspeed supercharger



## VWxghost (Dec 14, 2009)

I've been doing research about things i can do for my SC build. In the huge charger thread that JettaRed made i saw that some guys where doing a FMIC set up. I found a for sale thread where someone was selling an inter cooler set up and it didn't look to terrible to accomplish. I can weld a little bit and i know some people that can help me out. I just need to know if doing an inter cooler set up is worth it? Are the horsepower gains going to justify running that set-up? Even if i gain a little bit i still want to do it because i like the challenge. :thumbup: Now, please don't tell me to go turbo or sell it. I'm working with what i have.

Link to inter-cooler: http://forums.vwvortex.com/showthread.php?2708617-Neuspeed-Supercharger-w-intercooler-manifold 

Thanks


----------



## Daskoupe (Oct 9, 2006)

having done it a front mount on a NS charger.Just run a water/meth setup.
More performance and all you gotta do is keep the tank full lol


----------



## VWxghost (Dec 14, 2009)

Daskoupe said:


> having done it a front mount on a NS charger.Just run a water/meth setup.
> More performance and all you gotta do is keep the tank full lol


would it be beneficial to do both?


----------



## Daskoupe (Oct 9, 2006)

Unless you have a machinist at your disposal its way to much work to do the front mount.


----------



## VWxghost (Dec 14, 2009)

i now its going to take some work. But i just need to know if its worth it


----------



## Daskoupe (Oct 9, 2006)

nope.Running water meth and the smallest pulley.We used a new south perfomance intake manifold gasket to help with heat soak.

Cheap list here

C2 #30 tune 
Smallest pulley
Water/meth
AEG lower intake manifold
NSP cool gasket
AT 270 cam
Raceland header

Car was fun to drive and sounded crazy.I like the NS charger!


----------



## VWxghost (Dec 14, 2009)

Daskoupe said:


> nope.Running water meth and the smallest pulley.We used a new south perfomance intake manifold gasket to help with heat soak.
> 
> Cheap list here
> 
> ...


alright thanks. So it was on an ABA? My list is going to look like this:
*going on an AEG*

C2 #42 tune w/ injectors
smallest pulley
water/meth
AT 260 cam
full 2.5" exhaust
NSP cool gasket ( i still have to look it up but it sounds legit )
mild port and polish (maybe)
light weight pulleys, not underdrive
full cold air intake ( into the fender well

My ultimate goal is like 170 to the wheels, which is why i was so set on an intercooler. I've seen a dyno where i think one made like 178. We will see though


----------



## Daskoupe (Oct 9, 2006)

i believe the 42's will be to much fuel man


----------



## VWxghost (Dec 14, 2009)

Daskoupe said:


> i believe the 42's will be to much fuel man


thats kinda what i thought too. I talked to C2 and for the AEG they only have the 42# tune apparently...


----------



## Daskoupe (Oct 9, 2006)

United motorsports?


----------



## VWxghost (Dec 14, 2009)

Daskoupe said:


> United motorsports?


they said the same thing. i was going to do that but its $400 for the united and $375 for C2


----------



## MKIII_96 (Nov 25, 2006)

would an intercooler really be beneficial since the supercharger is built into the manifold? i can see an intercooler helping if it was supercharger-IC-engine but not really IC-supercharger-engine...might as well just buy a cold air intake or something


----------



## MKIII_96 (Nov 25, 2006)

nevermind i just read your link to the fs thread:facepalm: lol i didnt know anyone made anything like that


----------



## blubayou (Oct 3, 2001)

ahem - I'll chime in now:























































I've been wanting to do this since I got my supercharger when they first came out. Bought the car back after selling it a few years ago and decided to cut the ting up and make it a reality. I'm using a 6x6x2.5" Bell air/water core placed just after the charger outlet (as you can see in one of the above pics). IC will bolt to the charger with 3/8" flanges and exit into a small plenum, which will be attached to the end of a stock upper manifold. As of now it looks like I'll have this buttoned up by the end of the month. I'll be able to remove the IC as needed, and even toyed around with putting an air/air in there to test and see which works better, though that won't happen for a while. A/W is the priority. Water lines are plumbed and pump is mounted/wired already.

Engine was run on the neuspeed software until I started working on this. I have since swapped in a c2 chip and 30lb injectors, though I haven't run it on them yet (since the charger as been apart the whole time).


----------



## blubayou (Oct 3, 2001)

BTW, not doing this to be the fastest. Just doing it because no one ever dared to try it and I believe it could be beneficial. I'll run a smaller pulley once I see the outlet temps on the stock pulley.

The efficiency of the a/w setup and extremely short/direct intake path should make this a pretty effective solution.


----------



## VWxghost (Dec 14, 2009)

what car is it for? mk3 or 4?


----------



## jcthelight (Feb 5, 2010)

i have the united 36lb tune on my car running the ns charger and 2.2" pulley hit 15lbs of boost and have a Snow performance stage 2 w/m kit i'm goin to put on and just without the w/m its still pretty fast so i can imagine what its gonna do once i install it but gotta put a new clutch in first it died the other day


----------



## VWxghost (Dec 14, 2009)

jcthelight said:


> i have the united 36lb tune on my car running the ns charger and 2.2" pulley hit 15lbs of boost and have a Snow performance stage 2 w/m kit i'm goin to put on and just without the w/m its still pretty fast so i can imagine what its gonna do once i install it but gotta put a new clutch in first it died the other day


Thats what i like to see! so your running that little 2.2 with no W/M at all? Damn you should go down to 1.9 when you get it. Ever have it dyno'd?


----------



## jcthelight (Feb 5, 2010)

VWxghost said:


> Thats what i like to see! so your running that little 2.2 with no W/M at all? Damn you should go down to 1.9 when you get it. Ever have it dyno'd?


No not yet gotta find room under the hood for my w/m no where to mount the pump and bottle its on a beetle so room is limited i plan on it tho soon after i replace my clutch.


----------



## blubayou (Oct 3, 2001)

VWxghost said:


> what car is it for? mk3 or 4?


96 aba engine in a mk2 jetta coupe


----------



## VWxghost (Dec 14, 2009)

jcthelight said:


> No not yet gotta find room under the hood for my w/m no where to mount the pump and bottle its on a beetle so room is limited i plan on it tho soon after i replace my clutch.


i didnt know you could run the 36lbers. I talked to a guy from United and he said i had to go with the 40lbs


----------



## jcthelight (Feb 5, 2010)

VWxghost said:


> i didnt know you could run the 36lbers. I talked to a guy from United and he said i had to go with the 40lbs


Tom and Jeff made it work. Originally was supposed to be but the 42lb porche inj. were to short.


----------



## blubayou (Oct 3, 2001)

jcthelight said:


> i have the united 36lb tune on my car running the ns charger and 2.2" pulley hit 15lbs of boost and have a Snow performance stage 2 w/m kit i'm goin to put on and just without the w/m its still pretty fast so i can imagine what its gonna do once i install it but gotta put a new clutch in first it died the other day


With a 2.2" pulley there must be a lot of heat in that 15psi! I think the 2.2" pulley puts your charger around 16k+ rpms range (at 6500 crank rpms). 

In the normal usage range I believe the increase in temp from the charger is ~130* , though I don't know what it is up around 16k rpms (bet it is closer to 200*). I'd be curious to see what your temp and psi #'s look like before and after the addition of w/m, you should see some good things!

At the 16k+ rpm level I would imagine you'd probably want to port and clearance the charger along with your meth injection to really get the most from it.

1.9" would put the charger in the 18-19k rpm range, which to me sounds like a short lived charger!


----------



## jcthelight (Feb 5, 2010)

blubayou said:


> With a 2.2" pulley there must be a lot of heat in that 15psi! I think the 2.2" pulley puts your charger around 16k rpms range (at 6500 crank rpms).
> 
> In the normal usage range I believe the increase in temp from the charger is ~130* , though I don't know what it is up around 16k rpms (bet it is closer to 200*). I'd be curious to see what your temp and psi #'s look like before and after the addition of w/m, you should see some good things!
> 
> ...


I'm staying with the 2.2 and i'm going to spray before the charger. But i can tell ya the first start up of the day is awsome really kicks you back some so if the w\m is going to make that happen i'll be happy with it next upgrade is the 268/270 cam then prolly swap it out for vr6T.


----------



## blubayou (Oct 3, 2001)

Good call, I probably wouldn't go below the 2.2 either. I have had the TT 268/260 cam in mine as long as I have had the charger in there, so I can't say exactly how much it changed things, but even on the stock pulley and the cam it makes the mk2 move along pretty well!


----------



## VWxghost (Dec 14, 2009)

Do you guys think that 170 is realistic on the charger? As of right now i have an AT260 cam in there. I should be putting the charger on in like a week when i get the rest of the parts...But when i'm done i should have:
-C2 or United tune with 40lb injectors
-Full cold air intake (in fender)
-at 260 cam
-W/M
-Full exhaust
-2.2" pulley
-eventually a port job

I mean i have seen dynos up to like 176 IIRC


----------



## blubayou (Oct 3, 2001)

Snippet from Greg at Neuspeed back in 2003 in response to questions of intercooling:

_"Right now, on our Clayton eddy-current type dyno, we are seeing peak HP
numbers in the 145hp range. Hypothetically, to get 20 extra road HP, we
would need to start with some sort of intercooler. A rough estimate of
temperature to horsepower benefit is for every 10 degree increase or
decrease in temp, rated power changes by 1%. So, to get the entire power
increase from an intercooler alone, we'd have to drop the temperature
inside the plenum by roughly 130 degrees F.

Looking at Eaton's graph for the M45 charger, the delta T across the blower
housing can be as high as 170 degrees (in a 10psi configuration.)
http://www.automotive.eaton.com/product/engine_controls/M45.html
So, it is possible that a very good intercooler alone might make a
significant contribution towards the goal of 20 extra road horsepower.

Another possibility to consider is spraying nitrous oxide into the plenum
rather than water. This would have to be an experiment performed in
gradual steps, but nitrous (N20) has a cooling effect on the intake charge
because you are converting it from a highly pressurized state to a less
pressurized state.

Finally, additional ignition spark energy on all the 2.0L engines is
welcome, although the latest 2002 cars have an individual coil pack for each
cylinder, eliminating the old wasted spark ignition design. This is a
subject that JettaRed and I have spoken about in much detail.
Unfortunately, the stock ignition system was never designed to support
forced induction cylinder pressures. As the cylinder pressure rises, the
chance that the spark will not make the jump from electrode to ground
increases. Ideally, with a more powerful ignition system, you could open up
the plug gap and increase power."_


----------



## VWxghost (Dec 14, 2009)

^^^ wow thank you! I want to do an intercooler but i dont want to hack up my charger. I'm really excited to get the mk4 on the road  surprise a couple people


----------



## blubayou (Oct 3, 2001)

I think w/m will help you achieve about the same result, no need to cut up the charger like I am. I'm doing it, well, just 'cause :laugh:


----------



## vento86 (Oct 13, 2008)

There was a guy that had a mk4 that was pushing almost 300 with his setup. I seen it like 3 years ago. I wish I could remember his name.


----------



## blubayou (Oct 3, 2001)

please post if you find it, as that seems way beyond the capacity if the m45.


----------



## blubayou (Oct 3, 2001)

I believe 300hp would require roughly 450 CFM out of the charger, which means overturning it considerably and dealing with the side effects of doing so:










Might be more possible with a m62, though I'd be happy to be proven wrong!


----------



## vento86 (Oct 13, 2008)

It was in the mk4 forum.


----------



## VWxghost (Dec 14, 2009)

vento86 said:


> It was in the mk4 forum.


i wanna know too. There are a lot of people who hate on the neuspeed blower. 300 is crazy

edit:
I'd be more than happy with 200 to the wheels


----------



## blubayou (Oct 3, 2001)

vento86 said:


> It was in the mk4 forum.


Couldn't find it in a search, but I'd believe it if I could see a dyno. Butt dyno's don't count


----------



## dodger21 (Jan 24, 2011)

I thought the Neuspeed kit had a M62 based charger?

If so, then 450cfm is outside the map just slightly but very possible...


----------



## blubayou (Oct 3, 2001)

damn, if it was an m62 I've been looking at the wrong maps for 8 years! :facepalm:

the cfm is possible on the m62, right around 14k rpms:


----------



## Fast VW (Sep 24, 2002)

Unfortunately the neuspeed charger is an M45. The most dyno proven whp I have seen was 180 in a MKIII with:
2.4 pulley
water injection
extensive headwork
header
no cat
2.5 exhaust
260/268 cam
C2 30# tune and 30# injectors

I wouldn't go anything smaller than a 2.4" pulley because you will be exceeding the rpm limit of the charger and producing more heat than you will be able to deal with IMO. 

The intercooler you have designed looks pretty cool. :thumbup:


----------



## blubayou (Oct 3, 2001)

Dodger21 had me questioning myself for a minute there, lol.

Once the intercooler is done I'll figure out which pulley I want to go down do, with 2.4" probably being the lowest I'd consider.

I'll be on a similar path with:

2.4 pulley (most likely)
AWIC
no headwork yet, but eventually I would like to
header - eventually
no cat (hollow)
2.25 exhaust
260/268 cam
C2 30# tune and 30# injectors


----------



## blubayou (Oct 3, 2001)

and to be honest it was/is fun in the mk2 without the smaller pulley and intercooler, so any gains I get from these mods and others will just add to the smiles. I could easily live with 180whp in my mk2


----------



## jcthelight (Feb 5, 2010)

I think you might be talking about a mk4 2.0 turbo setup this guy showed his dyno sheet it was rediculous 300+ to the wheels.


----------



## VWxghost (Dec 14, 2009)

haha even 180 is enough for me. But whats this i hear that the 42lb tune and injectors is too much for the mk4?


----------



## blubayou (Oct 3, 2001)

I haven't any experience with anything besides the stock injectors, 4 bar and neuspeed tune so far, though I will be on the 30lb injectors and C2 software once my setup is fired up again. I think the 30lb configuration is good to ~250hp, so I'm not sure why 42lb would be needed


----------



## VWxghost (Dec 14, 2009)

blubayou said:


> I haven't any experience with anything besides the stock injectors, 4 bar and neuspeed tune so far, though I will be on the 30lb injectors and C2 software once my setup is fired up again. I think the 30lb configuration is good to ~250hp, so I'm not sure why 42lb would be needed


Ya, well my situation with the charger is like this. I need to buy $90 worth of parts to put it on. I paid $700 shipped ( from Nova Scotia ) for the blower and a random bag of nuts and bolts 2 brackets and the actual pulley with no mounting plate. The threads on most of the bolts are all stretched so those are junk. I need the manifold bolts which end up being like $35 for all 5. Then i need all the hoses and pulley mount and some check valves and some clamps. On top of all that the tune that he gave me doesnt work for my car. So i'm trying to sell it in the mk4 classifieds. I wanna go with C2 but i dont want to get 42lb injectors because they are really expensive...

anyone have any of that stuff i need for sale?


----------



## blubayou (Oct 3, 2001)

Ah, I didn't catch the post about C2 only having a 42# tune till I just reread the thread.....


----------



## vento86 (Oct 13, 2008)

Nope. It was the NS charger. He had the 270 cam, worked head, small pulley and a bunchof other stuff. I really wana find it.


jcthelight said:


> I think you might be talking about a mk4 2.0 turbo setup this guy showed his dyno sheet it was rediculous 300+ to the wheels.


----------



## VWxghost (Dec 14, 2009)

vento86 said:


> Nope. It was the NS charger. He had the 270 cam, worked head, small pulley and a bunchof other stuff. I really wana find it.


dooo ittt


----------



## Fast VW (Sep 24, 2002)

I have the 30# injectors and C2 30# tune on my charger and upgrading to the C2 software was like night and day. For the MKIV they (C2) never developed 30# software. There is a guy on here, I think his name is mcneil, that has a charger on a MKIV with the 42# injectors and matching software. He has put down some nice numbers as well.


----------



## VWxghost (Dec 14, 2009)

Fast VW said:


> I have the 30# injectors and C2 30# tune on my charger and upgrading to the C2 software was like night and day. For the MKIV they (C2) never developed 30# software. There is a guy on here, I think his name is mcneil, that has a charger on a MKIV with the 42# injectors and matching software. He has put down some nice numbers as well.


I knew when i heard C2 was in the supercharger game that i had to have that software. I also heard that the Neuspeed software is too lean. I'm really disappointed because i wanted to feel the Charger with the neuspeed flash then feel it with the C2 flash  I think i might buy the stuff from neuspeed tomorrow, i can't wait anymore I'm to anxious to get the mk4 running.

Also i just wanted to thank everyone who has contributed to this thread. :beer:


----------



## jcthelight (Feb 5, 2010)

VWxghost said:


> I knew when i heard C2 was in the supercharger game that i had to have that software. I also heard that the Neuspeed software is too lean. I'm really disappointed because i wanted to feel the Charger with the neuspeed flash then feel it with the C2 flash  I think i might buy the stuff from neuspeed tomorrow, i can't wait anymore I'm to anxious to get the mk4 running.
> 
> Also i just wanted to thank everyone who has contributed to this thread. :beer:


Yeah that NS software is lean i couldn't believe it when i got my tune big difference in fact i had to go back to have it fine tuned once i got my wideband on cause it was running a little lean still now its running great i had it in the low 11's so far thats pretty rich.


----------



## Fast VW (Sep 24, 2002)

VWxghost said:


> I knew when i heard C2 was in the supercharger game that i had to have that software. I also heard that the Neuspeed software is too lean. I'm really disappointed because i wanted to feel the Charger with the neuspeed flash then feel it with the C2 flash  I think i might buy the stuff from neuspeed tomorrow, i can't wait anymore I'm to anxious to get the mk4 running.
> 
> Also i just wanted to thank everyone who has contributed to this thread. :beer:


Just do NOT run anything smaller than a 2.6" pulley with the neuspeed software because you will run dangerously lean.


----------



## VWxghost (Dec 14, 2009)

Im not worried lol because I cant even run the neuspeed stuff so im going straight for the C2 tune


----------



## dodger21 (Jan 24, 2011)

Fast VW said:


> Unfortunately the neuspeed charger is an M45...


Dang, would I be the first ABA to run a M62???

I like this uncharted territory...


----------



## blubayou (Oct 3, 2001)

I want to say no, you wouldn't be the first. I'm trying to find an example, but I'm 98.5% sure I've seen it done using an m62.

To hold you over while I try to find it:


----------



## jcthelight (Feb 5, 2010)

blubayou said:


> I want to say no, you wouldn't be the first. I'm trying to find an example, but I'm 98.5% sure I've seen it done using an m62.
> 
> To hold you over while I try to find it:


Now that i seen your post when i was up in conneticut getting my tune i seen this jetta with that type of charger. Jeff tuned that jetta its pretty fast around 200 hp or something like that.


----------



## dodger21 (Jan 24, 2011)

If you shorten that snout about 3", and put rotors there, that's how long the M62 is. I tried fitting it there but the alternator is in the way and I want to keep A/C. So above the exhaust it is going.


----------



## blubayou (Oct 3, 2001)

do you thinking you could swap out the snout for a longer one, moving the rotors further from the alternator? Not sure how long of a snout you can get though


----------



## VWxghost (Dec 14, 2009)

i was looking at threads about the BBM charger today.....i wish they would have made them for the mk4


----------



## jcthelight (Feb 5, 2010)

blubayou said:


> Snippet from Greg at Neuspeed back in 2003 in response to questions of intercooling:
> 
> _"Right now, on our Clayton eddy-current type dyno, we are seeing peak HP
> numbers in the 145hp range. Hypothetically, to get 20 extra road HP, we
> ...


 I went back and reread this post because you can do a better ignition system i seen a thread here on the tex that someone with the wasted spark system used 2 msd coils wired up to the module and it worked. I'd say give that a shot along with everything else.


----------



## jcthelight (Feb 5, 2010)

Any progress on the IC?


----------



## VWxghost (Dec 14, 2009)

jcthelight said:


> Any progress on the IC?


nah i guess i probably wont do one. I'll just go the traditional water/meth set up. Supercharger is going on within 5 days


----------



## VWxghost (Dec 14, 2009)




----------



## jcthelight (Feb 5, 2010)

VWxghost said:


> nah i guess i probably wont do one. I'll just go the traditional water/meth set up. Supercharger is going on within 5 days


Why not the IC? Well i'm gonna see if I can find time to throw my m/w kit on this weekend. Been wanting to find time for months now its been sitting at the shop in my tool box collecting dust. LOL.


----------



## VWxghost (Dec 14, 2009)

jcthelight said:


> its been sitting at the shop in my tool box collecting dust. LOL.


just like my supercharger lol


----------



## jcthelight (Feb 5, 2010)

VWxghost said:


> just like my supercharger lol


LOL


----------



## bluedemond25 (Nov 10, 2010)

VWxghost said:


> i wanna know too. There are a lot of people who hate on the neuspeed blower. 300 is crazy
> 
> edit:
> I'd be more than happy with 200 to the wheels


what part of ohio r u from?


----------



## VWxghost (Dec 14, 2009)

bluedemond25 said:


> what part of ohio r u from?


Northeast Ohio

Medina to be exact


----------



## krazeteggie (Jan 29, 2007)

Props to the guy doing an awic. Looks like it should flow enough for you, keep in mind you might loose a couple psi from the ic. I'd crank up the boost regardless to make the ic worth having. 

The fmic kit is _alright_, but having couplers pre throttle body is always a big no no. In my opinion it would be a very nice kit if he put the throttle body right on the intake manifold and just ran a 3" short ram intake off the supercharger.


----------



## cetanepusher (Mar 24, 2008)

blubayou said:


> ahem - I'll chime in now:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


It's not going to work. As soon as you put heat to the manifold (I/E weld it) the bearing bores will be out of spec, and it will knock. Basically the call out on the bearing bores for the rotors, is +/- 0.0002 

Trust me, all you did was destroy a good housing. The rotors are never gonna spin right in those bores again.


----------



## cetanepusher (Mar 24, 2008)

blubayou said:


> BTW, not doing this to be the fastest. Just doing it because no one ever dared to try it and I believe it could be beneficial. I'll run a smaller pulley once I see the outlet temps on the stock pulley.
> 
> The efficiency of the a/w setup and extremely short/direct intake path should make this a pretty effective solution.


The cost of intercooling the supercharger with the space constraints under the hood made it not cost effective. 

The best way to get the most power is: 
C2 42# software. 
9.0:1 forged pistons
Big valve/ ported to shiz head
Schrick turbo grind Stage 4 G60 cam and valvetrain
Methanol injection
2.4" pulley
A/C delete
P/S delete
Tuned length race header
S-ported housing
5th gen rotors

With the above, you can go to 12-14psi, kicking on the meth injection at WOT. You won't need the intercooler, and you should be making 220 WHP with a good clutch and built trans. 

I have the head specs and cam specs needed to do this. I also have a NEW blower with the s-port
and teflon rotors.


----------



## VWxghost (Dec 14, 2009)

cetanepusher said:


> The cost of intercooling the supercharger with the space constraints under the hood made it not cost effective.
> 
> The best way to get the most power is:
> C2 42# software.
> ...


:thumbup::thumbup::thumbup::thumbup:

edit: Jettared made 15psi


----------



## cetanepusher (Mar 24, 2008)

VWxghost said:


> :thumbup::thumbup::thumbup::thumbup:
> 
> edit: Jettared made 15psi



Wonder what it put to the wheels? the slush box trans rob almost 35% of the engines power. 

Imagine just having 170WHP in a MKI or MKII, and peak torque at under 4000 rpm.


----------



## VWxghost (Dec 14, 2009)

cetanepusher said:


> Wonder what it put to the wheels? the slush box trans rob almost 35% of the engines power.
> 
> Imagine just having 170WHP in a MKI or MKII, and peak torque at under 4000 rpm.


----------



## cetanepusher (Mar 24, 2008)

VWxghost said:


>


Needs a smaller pulley, and you need to pull the brass orifice out of the vaccum inlet on the actuator with the linkage setups. It will allow the motor to "come on" boost quicker. The linkage actually takes more effort to pull, and slows the actuation, pull the orifice and problem solved.


----------



## blubayou (Oct 3, 2001)

cetanepusher said:


> It's not going to work. As soon as you put heat to the manifold (I/E weld it) the bearing bores will be out of spec, and it will knock. Basically the call out on the bearing bores for the rotors, is +/- 0.0002
> 
> Trust me, all you did was destroy a good housing. The rotors are never gonna spin right in those bores again.


I see what you mean, though I have already reinstalled the rotors and spun the charger to a decent rpm level with no detectable knock. The welds aren't right by the rotor housing and they weren't done in one shot, so heat on the rotor housing was minimal. The rotor housing wasn't hot to touch with a bare hand and was arguably cooler than it might be when running the engine hard for any extended period of time.

There is still a bit of work to be done, and if I find that there is an issue with the rotor housing at some point, I'll be the first to admit that I f'd it up. No big deal. I'll pick up another non-neuspeed charger that I can make fit with custom mounts and an adapter plate on the outlet. Afterall, the only special thing about the Neuspeed charger is the fact that it includes the integrated manifold, which could also be seen as its biggest downfall if you're looking to increase its output. 

Or I could just go to a turbo 



cetanepusher said:


> The cost of intercooling the supercharger with the space constraints under the hood made it not cost effective.
> 
> The best way to get the most power is:
> C2 42# software.
> ...


Do you mean that it wasn't cost effective for neuspeed or for me?

What's your cost estimate for all of the above, if you don't mind me asking, and has anyone actually run that setup to see the expected results? I don't think I've seen anyone come even close to 220whp with a neuspeed charger, even 200whp. It would seem like you would have a pretty healthy investment in the above.

I'd like to know more about the s-ported housing if you have any info to share. Sent you a PM, too :thumbup:

Thanks - Greg


----------



## cetanepusher (Mar 24, 2008)

blubayou said:


> I see what you mean, though I have already reinstalled the rotors and spun the charger to a decent rpm level with no detectable knock. The welds aren't right by the rotor housing and they weren't done in one shot, so heat on the rotor housing was minimal. The rotor housing wasn't hot to touch with a bare hand and was arguably cooler than it might be when running the engine hard for any extended period of time.
> 
> There is still a bit of work to be done, and if I find that there is an issue with the rotor housing at some point, I'll be the first to admit that I f'd it up. No big deal. I'll pick up another non-neuspeed charger that I can make fit with custom mounts and an adapter plate on the outlet. Afterall, the only special thing about the Neuspeed charger is the fact that it includes the integrated manifold, which could also be seen as its biggest downfall if you're looking to increase its output.
> 
> ...


220whp was on E85 and 11:1 pistons. with 9:1 pistons and 91 octane, with serious headwork, 180-190 is more realistic at 7k + rpm. 
S-ported housings were not available to the public. It's something I did on my housing. 

If you want to get more power, I'd suggest a cutom MP62 setup with the intercooler. It could be mounted in much the same way as the Bahn Brenner setup.


----------



## blubayou (Oct 3, 2001)

good info. I'll see what happens with the 45 and keep an eye out for an mp62 if I'm not happy with the results :thumbup:


----------



## blubayou (Oct 3, 2001)

any chance of seeing a dyno of the 220whp run? I'd love to see what it looks like


----------



## cetanepusher (Mar 24, 2008)

blubayou said:


> any chance of seeing a dyno of the 220whp run? I'd love to see what it looks like


I don't have any video, and it was done a quite a few years ago.


----------



## blubayou (Oct 3, 2001)

oh, I was just looking for a plot. no worries if you don't have it though


----------



## cetanepusher (Mar 24, 2008)

That I do have, however its proprietary data.


----------



## jcthelight (Feb 5, 2010)

cetanepusher said:


> Needs a smaller pulley, and you need to pull the brass orifice out of the vaccum inlet on the actuator with the linkage setups. It will allow the motor to "come on" boost quicker. The linkage actually takes more effort to pull, and slows the actuation, pull the orifice and problem solved.


What orfice are you talking about pic please?


----------



## cetanepusher (Mar 24, 2008)

jcthelight said:


> What orfice are you talking about pic please?


The vaccumm line going from the manifold/rotor housing to the bypass actuator. Pull the line off and there will be a small brass fitting on the actuator. pull that off for quicker boost response and bypass. 

NOT recomended unless your using the linkage setups for hood clearance on MKI chassis cars. 

If you do it on a MKIV, you'll **** a piston.


----------



## blubayou (Oct 3, 2001)

cetanepusher said:


> That I do have, however its proprietary data.


Thought that might be the case. :beer:


----------



## Jay-Bee (Sep 22, 2007)

McNeil made 155whp with his NS/SC setup. I don't know where all these 170+ numbers are coming from.

http://forums.vwvortex.com/showthread.php?3499252-Latest-MKIV-NS-S-C-Dyno-with-video


----------



## VWxghost (Dec 14, 2009)

Jay-Bee said:


> McNeil made 155whp with his NS/SC setup. I don't know where all these 170+ numbers are coming from.
> 
> http://forums.vwvortex.com/showthread.php?3499252-Latest-MKIV-NS-S-C-Dyno-with-video


theres no head work or water meth on that list, that may be why


----------



## cetanepusher (Mar 24, 2008)

Jay-Bee said:


> McNeil made 155whp with his NS/SC setup. I don't know where all these 170+ numbers are coming from.
> 
> http://forums.vwvortex.com/showthread.php?3499252-Latest-MKIV-NS-S-C-Dyno-with-video


Thats a pretty basic setup. With major portwork, a dedicated dual pattern high lift forced induction cam, pistons and smaller pulley, along with lower compression 9:1 (pump gas) or higher compression 11:1 (e85) 200+ Whp is easily obtainable. You can work that blower to make 14psi if you know what your doing. 

This part # is a must: 244.01.681-02


----------



## blubayou (Oct 3, 2001)

cetanepusher said:


> The vaccumm line going from the manifold/rotor housing to the bypass actuator. Pull the line off and there will be a small brass fitting on the actuator. pull that off for quicker boost response and bypass.
> 
> NOT recomended unless your using the linkage setups for hood clearance on MKI chassis cars.
> 
> If you do it on a MKIV, you'll **** a piston.


Would it do the same on an ABA?


----------



## VWxghost (Dec 14, 2009)

hey guys i finally have the charger fully installed. I love the whine


----------



## blubayou (Oct 3, 2001)

:thumbup:


----------



## cetanepusher (Mar 24, 2008)

blubayou said:


> Would it do the same on an ABA?


Eh, probably not so bad. Weight of the car IE: torque resistance is the issue. Considering a MKI is close to 1000 lbs lighter than a MKIV, its not so harsh on the motor.


----------



## blubayou (Oct 3, 2001)

Ah, I see. I've got mine on an ABA in a mk2, so kinda in between. I checked out that fitting on mine last night and it has a TINY hole in it. I can see how pulling it should make a noticeable difference. I didn't remove it, but wondered if it would be something to consider doing on mine for quicker response (or maybe even just opening up the hole in the fitting a bit).


----------



## hookdub (Nov 21, 2003)

The following is ment to try to keep in the 16000 RPM supercharger limit.

With 6500 RPM rev limiter the smallest pulley you could run is a 2.2". That would put the actual blower RPM @ 16250

Raising the engine limit to 7000 would put you to a 2.4"pulley putting the blower @ 16042 RPM 

The variability in these setups is when the blower comes on with respect to the engine RPM. I realy wouldn't think any of these setups would affect max boost. I'm currently running close to the latter set up. I just wanted to see if people have tried both and what they like. 

Im running the C2 30# set up
TT 268/260 cam
TT dual valve springs
2.4" pulley

BTW thanks for the tip on removing the small brass fitting. I'm currently wrestling with my clutch set up. Long story, but after I get the parts checked its possible that the I got 2 flywheels that were machined wrong by the manufacturer. :banghead: After I get it back on the road I'll have to try pulling that restrictive orifice.


----------



## hookdub (Nov 21, 2003)

Oh, I one thing. 

Considering the amount of work it would take to get an IC on the neuspeed SC, I always figured with the amount of work it would take to fab something up is beter directed in a different set up. Wouldn't time be beter spent on customing an M62 setup? I mean to have to cut, weld, machine and plumb it up, you may as well have a blower that can put out more volume, be more underdriven, and be closer to the efficient point in the boost map. Im not sure what the parasitic drag of an M45 is compared to the M62, but maybe thats the point? I wonder what the drag of an M45 is putting out 13# and compare it to an M62 putting out comperable volume/pressure? That is the big question! 

..............and that whine from the Eaton is the sh*t. :thumbup:


----------



## Glegor (Mar 31, 2008)

VWxghost said:


> Do you guys think that 170 is realistic on the charger? As of right now i have an AT260 cam in there. I should be putting the charger on in like a week when i get the rest of the parts...But when i'm done i should have:
> -C2 or United tune with 40lb injectors
> -Full cold air intake (in fender)
> -at 260 cam
> ...


why are you running such a little cam? you are aware that a bigger cam will make bigger power on your setup?


----------



## VWxghost (Dec 14, 2009)

Glegor said:


> why are you running such a little cam? you are aware that a bigger cam will make bigger power on your setup?


its what the PO did before i bought the car


----------



## cetanepusher (Mar 24, 2008)

blubayou said:


> Ah, I see. I've got mine on an ABA in a mk2, so kinda in between. I checked out that fitting on mine last night and it has a TINY hole in it. I can see how pulling it should make a noticeable difference. I didn't remove it, but wondered if it would be something to consider doing on mine for quicker response (or maybe even just opening up the hole in the fitting a bit).


It will make the car come on boost and off boost way quick. It will also void the Nuespeed warranty. 

Not recomended on the heavy cars, or for a daily driver. No reason to screw with the size. Basically, when you want to dick around, take it off, when your daily driving it, put it back on. 

Think of it this way, it will slam the bypass shut a LOT faster, slaming the pistons with boost a LOT faster.


----------



## cetanepusher (Mar 24, 2008)

hookdub said:


> The following is ment to try to keep in the 16000 RPM supercharger limit.
> 
> With 6500 RPM rev limiter the smallest pulley you could run is a 2.2". That would put the actual blower RPM @ 16250
> 
> ...


Where are you getting your supercharger RPM data?


----------



## cetanepusher (Mar 24, 2008)

blubayou said:


> do you thinking you could swap out the snout for a longer one, moving the rotors further from the alternator? Not sure how long of a snout you can get though


Snouts can be had in pretty much any length you need. Contact Magnacharger. 

As for the MP62, it would be great on a 2.0, but If I were doing it I would wait a few more months. Eaton doesn't just make the new TVS rotors in 1900 and 2300. They are available in R410cc, R900cc, R1320cc, and R1650cc .


----------



## cetanepusher (Mar 24, 2008)

jcthelight said:


> I went back and reread this post because you can do a better ignition system i seen a thread here on the tex that someone with the wasted spark system used 2 msd coils wired up to the module and it worked. I'd say give that a shot along with everything else.


I ran one MSD Blaster and it worked bitchin, It's for sale as well.


----------



## blubayou (Oct 3, 2001)

cetanepusher said:


> It will make the car come on boost and off boost way quick. It will also void the Nuespeed warranty.
> 
> Not recomended on the heavy cars, or for a daily driver. No reason to screw with the size. Basically, when you want to dick around, take it off, when your daily driving it, put it back on.
> 
> Think of it this way, it will slam the bypass shut a LOT faster, slaming the pistons with boost a LOT faster.


Makes perfect sense :beer: not worried about the neuspeed warranty on mine. that's long gone


----------



## VWxghost (Dec 14, 2009)

got my green tops today  just need a 3" vr maf housing or a billet housing. I forgot ask a while ago, what are the benefits of going to a C2 or United 42# tune rather than the stock neuspeed tune?


----------



## cetanepusher (Mar 24, 2008)

c2 has a lot of Supercharged application experience. IE datalogs.


----------



## 91RedWagen (Jun 10, 2011)

w long t e to build?


----------



## jcthelight (Feb 5, 2010)

cetanepusher said:


> I ran one MSD Blaster and it worked bitchin, It's for sale as well.


 
How did you run one? What coil setup do you have?


----------



## cetanepusher (Mar 24, 2008)

jcthelight said:


> How did you run one? What coil setup do you have?


I Fabbed it up using the OEM ignition module wired to the MSD. 

http://forums.vwvortex.com/showthre...Blaster-SS-coil-with-Ignition-Control-Module.










I'm not sure what the MKIV AEG uses, but it should be something similar. You just need to find the OEM leads that fire the coilpack and wire in the MSD.


----------



## VWxghost (Dec 14, 2009)

So whats the benefit to having the TT 268/260 g60 cam as opposed to the AT260* i have now?


----------



## cetanepusher (Mar 24, 2008)

VWxghost said:


> So whats the benefit to having the TT 268/260 g60 cam as opposed to the AT260* i have now?


The dedicated Forced induction cams don't have as much valve overlap, if any at all. Naturally Aspirated engines use valve overlap to scavenge the cylinders for more Horsepower, it will actually lose torque, but that is negated by the fact that the motor can rev up easier, creating horsepower. If you use this type of cam in a FI application, you lose boost pressure through the exhaust valve. Forced Induction doesn't need the cam to scavenge the cylinders, as the "pump" (Turbocharger or Supercharger) will do it for the motor. This allows all the pressurized air to remain in the cylinder for combustion. 

The TT G60 cam is Okay, but ballers run Dr. Schrick


----------



## VWxghost (Dec 14, 2009)

cetanepusher said:


> The dedicated Forced induction cams don't have as much valve overlap, if any at all. Naturally Aspirated engines use valve overlap to scavenge the cylinders for more Horsepower, it will actually lose torque, but that is negated by the fact that the motor can rev up easier, creating horsepower. If you use this type of cam in a FI application, you lose boost pressure through the exhaust valve. Forced Induction doesn't need the cam to scavenge the cylinders, as the "pump" (Turbocharger or Supercharger) will do it for the motor. This allows all the pressurized air to remain in the cylinder for combustion.
> 
> The TT G60 cam is Okay, but ballers run Dr. Schrick


thanks for the info :thumbup: I really want that forced induction cam now :laugh:


----------



## Fast VW (Sep 24, 2002)

VWxghost said:


> thanks for the info :thumbup: I really want that forced induction cam now :laugh:


Your AT260 is actually a 260/256 forced induction cam (it is similar to the TT260/256). The TT268/260 cam has more lift, more duration and more valve overlap. The TT268/260 will make a few more HP at a slightly higher rpm at the expense of some low rpm torque vs. the AT260


----------



## VWxghost (Dec 14, 2009)

hooked up my boost gauge today. Just revved it up a bit and its lookin like 3-4psi at 3k rpm's


----------



## blubayou (Oct 3, 2001)

Fast VW said:


> The TT268/260 cam has more lift, more duration and more valve overlap. The TT268/260 will make a few more HP at a slightly higher rpm at the expense of some low rpm torque vs. the AT260


The TT 268/260 is what I've run with my charger since day one (installed them at the same time in 2002 or so). :thumbup:


----------



## VWxghost (Dec 14, 2009)

anyone know where the hell to route tubing for a boost gauge for a drive by cable mk4? The one grommet everyone says to use has my throttle cable through it


----------



## cetanepusher (Mar 24, 2008)

VWxghost said:


> anyone know where the hell to route tubing for a boost gauge for a drive by cable mk4? The one grommet everyone says to use has my throttle cable through it


Make a new hole next to it and use a similar grommet.


----------



## hookdub (Nov 21, 2003)

> Originally Posted by cetanepusher
> Where are you getting your supercharger RPM data?


Just reserch. I have an excel table I put together with drop down lists enteered in a few formulas. Just take the diameter of the crank pulley, the diameter of the NSSC pulleys and get the pulley ratio. Then you can look at different RPM engine vs SC rpm. The limiting factors are up to you. I used the Eaton spec for max RPM as a constraint. I then took the choises of supercharger pulleys from pulleyboys and the rest of the calculated figures and overlayed the set up on the eaton boost map.

look at the M62 vs the M45

*This is for the 4th gen M45*



















*this is for the 4th gen M62*


















Its interesting to see that in their respective applications the M62 may not look that impressive, but keep in mind that the m62 is ment for 2.0 to 4.0 liter engins and the M45 is ment for 1.0 to 2.4 liter engins. So with the larger M62, the pressure should be higher because the ABA can injest so much volume and the pressure will stack up and create higher manifold pressure. I havent spent too much time really comaparing the 2, but the power used to push any given volume of air is the same between the 2 blowers. Even the temperature at any given inlet volume is faily equal between the 2 blowers. So the difference is the M62 is a bit on the more efficient side, and has a higher max inlet volume.


----------



## VWxghost (Dec 14, 2009)

so is it safe if i drive the mk4 supercharged with stock software at like 4-5psi?


----------



## VWxghost (Dec 14, 2009)

I took it for its first drive today! On stock software.... 
1st gear: Takes off, whines a bit don't really boost
2nd gear: I'm on it, hit about 5psi (about 1/2-3/4th throttle, not at redline) the charger whine puts a smile on my face.
3rd gear: Just like second, 5psi, but faster
4th-5th gear: ^^^

Today's Conclusion:
I feel like i have made the right choice with this charger build. Although, it seems to be running very rich. Idle dips low and idle lopes, but I'm hoping the autotech 260 cam and stock software have a hand in that. Damn boost gauge pod keeps popping off the column when i turn because of the stiff as nylon tubing.. i need some double sided tape. :thumbup::thumbup:


----------



## VWxghost (Dec 14, 2009)

Is the bypass valve on the charger supposed to open every time you rev the engine? Mine pretty much stays closed all the time..i need to spray some wd-40 on it or something


----------



## VWxghost (Dec 14, 2009)

:wave:


----------



## cetanepusher (Mar 24, 2008)

VWxghost said:


> Is the bypass valve on the charger supposed to open every time you rev the engine? Mine pretty much stays closed all the time..i need to spray some wd-40 on it or something


The bypass is closed under boost conditions. When The car is idleing, or not under a load, it should be open. 

Basically the bypass is open all the time and closes when the blower starts making boost. The only way you would see it move, is if the hood was off and you were driving it, or it was on a chassis dyno.


----------



## VWxghost (Dec 14, 2009)

cetanepusher said:


> The bypass is closed under boost conditions. When The car is idleing, or not under a load, it should be open.
> 
> Basically the bypass is open all the time and closes when the blower starts making boost. The only way you would see it move, is if the hood was off and you were driving it, or it was on a chassis dyno.


yeah its closed all the time. Is it safe to take it off and wd40 it?


----------



## cetanepusher (Mar 24, 2008)

VWxghost said:


> yeah its closed all the time. Is it safe to take it off and wd40 it?


Nope, do not take it off. It has to be factory calibrated. Not hard on normal blowers, but the neuspeed has the dampner on it, and its a PITA to do even when assembling them at the plant. Forget about it on the car and the freezeplug installed. 

Try the WD40, they are all wiped down with the WD40 before they are bagged up and shipped out. 

Try pulling off the vaccuum line from the manifold, and use a vaccuum source on it with the other end attached to the actuator. If it moves, your bypass is fine. (it doesn't take much) 

Usually, if your car is making 5 psi, its working. However you NEED to get a FI file in the ECU, or your going to grenade that motor.


----------



## VWxghost (Dec 14, 2009)

cetanepusher said:


> Nope, do not take it off. It has to be factory calibrated. Not hard on normal blowers, but the neuspeed has the dampner on it, and its a PITA to do even when assembling them at the plant. Forget about it on the car and the freezeplug installed.
> 
> Try the WD40, they are all wiped down with the WD40 before they are bagged up and shipped out.
> 
> ...


lol decided to PM you


----------



## Fast VW (Sep 24, 2002)

I agree 100% stop driving the car until you get a FI tune or you will blow the motor.


----------



## VWxghost (Dec 14, 2009)

Fast VW said:


> I agree 100% stop driving the car until you get a FI tune or you will blow the motor.


haha yeah i will. I took it for two, 5 minute drives....i couldn't resist


----------



## VWxghost (Dec 14, 2009)

would it be safe to drive my car out of boost 5 seconds down the road to get an e-check


----------



## Fast VW (Sep 24, 2002)

No boost = safe
Temptation for boost = high
boost = boom


----------



## VWxghost (Dec 14, 2009)

Fast VW said:


> No boost = safe
> Temptation for boost = high
> boost = boom


haha okay, yeah you guys scared me to not boost until i get the tune and put in the injectors


----------



## VWxghost (Dec 14, 2009)

just sent in my ECU to get my UMS flash :thumbup:


----------



## cetanepusher (Mar 24, 2008)

VWxghost said:


> just sent in my ECU to get my UMS flash :thumbup:


Best thing you've done so far.


----------



## VWxghost (Dec 14, 2009)

So after reading the ultimate NS charger thread i really want to change the oil in the charger. Has anyone here changed the oil in it? I know i can use GM charger oil (part #12345982) But how difficult is it to do? and does anyone have a little DIY they could throw my way? all the pics and stuff are dead in that thread.


----------



## cetanepusher (Mar 24, 2008)

VWxghost said:


> So after reading the ultimate NS charger thread i really want to change the oil in the charger. Has anyone here changed the oil in it? I know i can use GM charger oil (part #12345982) But how difficult is it to do? and does anyone have a little DIY they could throw my way? all the pics and stuff are dead in that thread.


 Contact Neuspeed or Magnacharger directly. You need a molygaurd kit, with the proprietary supercharger oil. Don't use the GM stuff. Get the right stuff for the blower you have. I recomend you call magnacharger, and ask for a 120ml molygaurd kit. The DIY instructions can be found on the internets.


----------



## VWxghost (Dec 14, 2009)

got my ecu back from UMS. Hook it up and fire the car up and it sounds good. Then i realized that there is no CEL at anytime in my dash....drove the car around for like 20 minutes, all was good. Come home turn it off, immediately try to start it up and it would just crank over....i'm guess a bad ecu....$330 out the window


----------



## cetanepusher (Mar 24, 2008)

Probably a bad connection when you plugged the ECU back in. I hope you disconnected the battery when you re-installed the ECU.


----------



## VWxghost (Dec 14, 2009)

cetanepusher said:


> Probably a bad connection when you plugged the ECU back in. I hope you disconnected the battery when you re-installed the ECU.


of course lol Thats rule #1 when i do anything electrical. I have re connected the ecu like 4 times now. Maybe i keep fudging it up, Idk how i would though.


----------



## cetanepusher (Mar 24, 2008)

sh!tty for you.


----------



## VWxghost (Dec 14, 2009)

no activity here  anyone have anything new to report? I found out that the P.O covered up the CEL and airbag light with electrical tape....I un-tapped it and the CEL had codes stored. I read them, 3 misfire codes hopefully from when i unplugged the MAF, cleared them and let the car idle and rev for 10 minutes No CEL's yet. I still have to get an e-check


----------



## VWxghost (Dec 14, 2009)

anyone elses neuspeed blower sound like it has a blow off valve???


----------



## VWxghost (Dec 14, 2009)

any one have anything new to report?


----------



## cetanepusher (Mar 24, 2008)

Its the bypass valve. Perfectly normal.


----------



## VWxghost (Dec 14, 2009)

any progress from anyone :wave:


----------



## VWxghost (Dec 14, 2009)

VWxghost said:


> any progress from anyone :wave:


 .


----------



## .T.o.n.y. (Apr 3, 2003)

VWxghost said:


> any progress from anyone :wave:


 :wave:


----------



## blubayou (Oct 3, 2001)

I have an air/water IC built into the intake manifold on mine, however I haven't yet run coolant through it. Just a few little things to button up before I do (source a reservoir, get a couple of fittings, etc).


----------



## coolgents (Sep 27, 2010)

*Need Help on Neuspeed SuperCharger*

Hey Guys,

I need help badly, recently i have bought a golf MK4 engine with neuspeed charger on it from Japan. And i have make the conversion to a 1991 mk2 golf body. there is 2 problem im having on the conversion with the wiring issue.

#1. I tap the rpm signal from the coil pack but seem the voltage is not supplying to the normal voltage to fee my mk2 meter box with single socket. My rpm only can goes max on 3k rpm so i cant get the full reading of the engine running speed. Anybody done this before by tapping into another place to get the rpm reading signal? or can share me some picture or wiring diagram?

#2. The radiator temperature showing on my mk2 meter box is wrong, always on the optimum at 3/4 of the gauge sometimes the overheated light blink out if driving at the hot sunny day. I know the mk4 wiring system cycle will be the 4 pin temp sensor sending signal to ecu and then route bk to mk4 meter box. But now the problem is im using the mk2 meter box. How can i solve this issue to get the correct reading of my car radiator now? It can be using the mk2 temp sensor for the mk4 ecu as well, it will not have the correct reading as well.

Hope your guys can help me on both of my issue for this.

thanks


----------

