Feeler- D.I.Y. Eaton M62 Supercharger Kit

[CobraMarty]

The truck-lites are truely impressive, ask anyone that has them. If you have never tried them or experienced them, you can't have a valid opinion on them.

 

[urban yan]

3200 lumens is greater than 1200 lumens. I think this quote will serve my purposes quite nicely:

The math explains what you don't understand.

 

[bpas328xi]

According to this site (http://www.jeep4.0performance.4mg.com/tech_specs.html), the 0630 head casting (use from 96-99) has a flow rate of 209.0 CFM at 0.500" lift.

HIDs produce 3200lumens, those replacement truck-lites produce ~1200 lumens (~1/3 less light); when installed, your son went on to say
”All I have to say is "WOW!!!". Honestly, I'm in love with them! I actually enjoy driving my Cherokee at night now!!!”

Nobody would say that unless their HID project was a complete and utter failure, but I’m sure you’ll try to lie your way out of that one just like you’re trying to lie your way out of this M62 project.

You have NO credibility here.

My HIDs worked great. Until I had the bright (pun intended) idea to swap out to 55w ballasts and 6000k bulbs... Blew my bulbs out in a few months. When they were working, they were the brightest headlights I've ever been behind.
I wanted the truck-lites to begin with, but they were prohibitively expensive at the time (until a deal was found). I also went with the Truck-lites for longevity reasons since I can't seem to keep a Chinese HID bulb alive for more than a few months... I'm fine with my "~1200 lumens" because I have another 12,000 lumens worth of forward facing LED lighting on my Jeep.

Now... Back to the topic at hand. Theory is all fine and dandy (sometimes even fun to argue about), but the real world is where we'll find out who is correct...

See ya'll when this project is completed and running perfectly (which it will be. just like my sprintex supercharged jeep). You can't argue with the fact that we already have a WORKING supercharger install under our belts. Zero partial throttle issues. Zero IAT issues. Zero tuning issues. 5000+ trouble-free miles on my red lifted XJ. And yes, it's my daily.

Cherry o, old chaps.

 

[urban yan]

See ya'll when this project is completed and running perfectly (which it will be. just like my sprintex supercharged jeep). You can't argue with the fact that we already have a WORKING supercharger install under our belts. Zero partial throttle issues. Zero IAT issues. Zero tuning issues. 5000+ trouble-free miles on my red lifted XJ. And yes, it's my daily.

You mean the red lifted supercharged cherokee that took more than 10 seconds to go from 0-60?

 

[bpas328xi]

You mean the red lifted supercharged cherokee that took more than 10 seconds to go from 0-60?

In 100* summer heat with obnoxiously high IATs. I'll make a new video soon of it in its current state while making winter boost.

Also, the stock harmonic balancer is 6.0" in diameter. We pulled mine off and measured it so we could send the measurements to ATI. They're making me a 5% overdrive balancer.

 

[CobraMarty]

And a speedo that read incorrectly due to the 32" tires. Remember the picture which showed GPS 52 or 53 mph and the speedo showed 60mph.

 

[urban yan]

Not using a m90 equivalent Sprintex. The Sprintex supercharger used in my kit is actually slight smaller than a m62.

Sprintex = 57ci/rev
m62 = 62ci/rev

I would eventually like to upgrade to a S5-335 though (89ci/rev) along with a fully built 4.0, trans, rear end, etc., etc....
http://www.sprintex.com.au/sprintex/superchargers/

Oh, but wait a second, if the S5-210 is an M62 equivalent and you're not satisfied with it than why are you trying to cram an M62 down everyone's throat in this thread? You just proved my point regarding scalability.

 

[CobraMarty]

Two different topics. Completely satisfied with the Sprintex S5-210 kit.

Again the M62 is an entry level, low boost, low cost supercharger kit.
The sprintex kit is at the other end of the spectrum and we are pushing it to find it's and the stock, 150k 4.0L engine limits. We are currently seeing 8 pounds of boost from it and low IAT's and excellent drivability, all from a supercharger that is 'too small' as deamed by the naysayers.

Never said 'not satisfied with it'. Stop saying things that were never said by us.

Nobody is cramming anything down anyone's throat. Don't read it if you don't like the taste.

 

[CobraMarty]

There is no product here to sell, just a discussion, heated one at times, but just a discussion. The picture is not my own. I would not sell anything here as a dealer or such, just my own parts and leftovers, without becoming a vendor status first.

 

[bpas328xi]

There is no product here to sell, just a discussion, heated one at times, but just a discussion. The picture is not my own. I would not sell anything here as a dealer or such, just my own parts and leftovers, without becoming a vendor status first.

That too. Lol

 

[SVTJEEP]

Two different topics. Completely satisfied with the Sprintex S5-210 kit.

Again the M62 is an entry level, low boost, low cost supercharger kit.
The sprintex kit is at the other end of the spectrum and we are pushing it to find it's and the stock, 150k 4.0L engine limits. We are currently seeing 8 pounds of boost from it and low IAT's and excellent drivability, all from a supercharger that is 'too small' as deamed by the naysayers.
.

So I build a m90 set up on 210k on the motor, running only 6 injectors(36#), I can hit 6.5 pounds on the stock pulley right off idle. IAT dont get higher then 100. This took me 2-3 hours to make bracket install aem and fire up. I already want more boost and am going to try to get 10 psi out of the system. I dont understand why you are limiting your kit. Anyone looking for a supercharge kit wants more power, and once they have the basic kit they will want more power out of the kit. Dont limit your build to only the simple low boost kit. Build it so people can upgrade later. Think if you bought it and then found out that is all you can do with it. Just trying to help. Try mounting the m62 next to the ac compressor but also have holes in the brackets to mount a m90 also. Then it is the person buying the kit decision on what supercharger to use and how much they want to sink into parts. Most people on naxja are about upgrading and improving their jeep. So why go m62 if m90 is better.
One question.. Ford used the m90 years ago on a 3.8L and gm got rid of the m62 and replaced it with m90 for the 3.8L..So those to car companies used superchargers that are to large for their 3.8's???

 

[CobraMarty]

KISS principle. Entry level, 'low' 5-6pounds boost, safe, reliable. Not everyone is looking for or wants more, more, and more. We are the minority here, wanting more. I would not want to support , built up, upgrade later at the expense of reliability and cost. There are other 'kits' which use different superchargers, mounting, and tuning. This concept M62 is not that.

As for GM's use of the M62, On those vehicles, what was the crank and s/c pulley size? How much boost did those engines have? Smaller s/c pulleys increased the boost how much? Those are the questions to ask, not is the M90 too large for a 3.8. The M90 is good on 3.0-5.0L engines. Use it, I am not against the use of a M90.

I would retest your IAT's. The IAT's I am talking about are 'charge IAT's' at the intake manifold under boost. Not air filter or throttle body IAT's. Not at idle, cruising, around town, or blipping the throttle. I mean monitor the 'charge IAT's' on a WOT pedal to the floor max boost acceleration run, best done on a slight uphill. Your IAT's will definitely be way over 100* if not over 200*. The laws of thermodynamics are real. Remember PV=nRT. Eaton's own data page shows a 100-140* delta temp increase at 5psi, even high temps at higher psi.

 

[CobraMarty]

There are 2 different M62 superchargers-

1992-1993 Gen2 M62 2.5" pulley, uncoated rotors

1994-1995 Gen3 M62 2.8" pulley, had epoxy coated rotors for tighter internal tolerances and a larger inlet diameter for a larger TB. This gained about 20 horsepower and 20 ft/lbs of torque over the 92/93. Due to the 94/95 Gen3's increased VE (volumetric efficiency), the pulley in 94 and 95 was slightly larger, due to the fact that the Supercharger didn't need to spin as fast to produce the same boost or CFM.

I am using the early Gen2 M62.

 

[CobraMarty]

Finally got mine installed.

 

[(*~*) lost]

Nice install, post your FSC if you may.. But other wise lookin good

 

[(*~*) lost]

Never mind looks like I steeped in some bad soup lol.. Ftc1 or megasquirt..

 

[CobraMarty]

Split Second FTC1, special build.

 

[yossarian19]

Did I miss something, or isn't the M62 slightly larger than the Sprintex unit, which can hit 7.5 psi without any more than a 68mm throttle body?
The M62 should be fine. Ideal if you want to make big numbers? No. Definitely not. Good enough to push an XJ down the road at a much-improved pace? yeah. I'd think so.
M90 is a better choice for drivability, I'd think, because it will make boost at lower RPM - but then, OGS seems to be getting results from the 54mm pulley...
So whats the beef, guys?

 

[CobraMarty]

With the Sprintex 210, 70mmTB, and 54mm pulley we saw 12 pounds boost and spiked to 12.5 pounds and popped a head gasket. Yes the M62(62CI/rotation) and Sprintex 210(59CI/revolution) superchargers are big enough for the jeep 4.0. The M90 is physically bigger and has heavier rotors and would only have to have a large 3" pulley to use on the 4.0. The M90 would be better sized for a 4.6L stroker with a mild cam and head work.

 

[CobraMarty]

Sprintex 210 57CI/rev not 59.