Autorotor, Whipple, Lysholm

I've seen this article http://www.kennebell.net/techinfo/ford-techinfo/AUTOROTORvsLYSHOLM.pdf written in early 2005. The article states that the Autorotor is of better quality than Lysholm, true/false?
CT went back to the Lysholm, 1600AX http://www.lysholm.us/_1600ax.php, the newer version than the old rattling 1600AR. What is new in the Lysholm? Isn't it a quality step back going back to Lysholm?
Does it have any similarities with the Whipple W100AX?http://www.whipplesuperchargers.com/product.asp?ProdID=1162
Shad of DrivingAmbition mentioned that the brand Autorotor is going away.

Yes, I'm very confused by company, brand, Autorotor, Lysholm, Whipple, Opcon, SRM, Svenska Rotor AB and so on...
Could anybody clear this up?

I believe CT went back to Lysholm because they were having trouble getting the Autorotor units manufactured. The Autorotor is a more efficient, produces less heat and more power at the same amount of boost then the original Lysholm SC.

Anyone know the difference between the 1600AX and the 1600AR?

My Pops just got an Autorotor for his 97. Im Lookin forward to getting that thing in and trying it out.:biggrin:

From what I heard is that Opcon now owns both Lysholm and Autorotor.

Here in the USA there are 2 companies that sells the Twin Screw Supercharger.

1. Whipple sells the Lysholm
2. Kenne Bell (and SOS) sells the Autorotor

Before the Twin Screw patent ran it's 20 year~ course both Kenne Bell and Whipple had to procure their supercharger cores from Lysholm and Autorotor so that they can make the kits to fit on the cars/engines that were their target market.

The story that I heard was that since Opcon bought Lysholm and Autorotor they stopped selling the cores. I heard that it was either non-feasible financially to keep the facilities to make and sell the supercharger sores and/or there was a change in Opcon's direction (going with the green-tech boom).

As a result both Whipple and Kenne Bell sued Opcon (or something along those lines) since their business depended on this supply of blowers.

The material you supplied is correct and not just some marketing gimic.

The Autorotor is a better of the 2 Twin Screw.

Here are some of the reasons:

1. Billet casing, not cast. That means that it can run higher boost and the casing is stronger so there is less of a chance that it will twist. Twisting the casing might make the twin screws go outta alignment and that's a bad thing at those RPMs.

2. The components like gears, bearings, etc. are not only heavier duty, but also serviceable.

3. There are more lobes in the Autorotor design, which means that for roughly the same displacement supercharger Lysholm, it will push more air with less heat being generated.

Lysholm is cheaper to make. Just like the Eaton (who Magnacharger uses as their OEM supplier).

The Ford GT, Mercedes-Benz SLR McLaren, Mercedes-Benz C32 and SLK32 AMG, Mercedes-Benz E55 AMG, Mazda Millenia S, Koenigsegg CC8S and Mercury Marine engines (Verado series) have Lysholm type superchargers.

Eaton's Roots blowers are seen in the new ZR-1, CTS-V, etc.

If a NSX Lysholm were to compete with the Autorotor, it would have to be based on price.

BATMANs said:

The Autorotor is a better of the 2 Twin Screw.

Lysholm is cheaper to make. Just like the Eaton (who Magnacharger uses as their OEM supplier).

The Ford GT, Mercedes-Benz SLR McLaren, Mercedes-Benz C32 and SLK32 AMG, Mercedes-Benz E55 AMG, Mazda Millenia S, Koenigsegg CC8S and Mercury Marine engines (Verado series) have Lysholm type superchargers.

Click to expand...

I understand price determines a lot, but for the marques you just mentioned, with few exceptions, it can't mean that much. Why would they go with the cheaper, less powerful, less serviceable blower?

Caustic said:

I understand price determines a lot, but for the marques you just mentioned, with few exceptions, it can't mean that much. Why would they go with the cheaper, less powerful, less serviceable blower?

Click to expand...

I haven't seen or heard of both companies offering equal displacement blowers.

Let's say there is a 2.3 liter Lysholm and a 2.1 SOS (Autorotor).

Now ur dealing with apples and oranges in displacement.

Seldom have I seen an exact comparison in displacement.

Sure the Lysholm is less efficient, but it's larger.

So at the end of the day with a Laminova intercooler they probably make the same HP on the NSX. The difference would probably be so minute that other factors (made on a Weds. vs. mon/fri car, other supporting mods, etc.) may play a more significant role on power, etc.

If a 2.3 Lysholm was sold with a Laminova intercooler for about the same price as the SOS blower by itself, I would suspect that many will go the route of the Lysholm since it will suffice for most people's application(s).

Even though the Lysholm is less serviceable, it would be years before the average NSX owner even see any service.

I called up Whipple (who uses Lysholm) and they said that the only service required (like Autorotor) would be an oil change every 75k - 100k miles (depending on how hard u drive the car).

With regards to servicing, they said that they can change out the bearings and most of the smaller components.

Over all both blowers (including the Eaton/Maggie types) are pretty reliable. I've rarely heard stories of failures.

One thing that I makes me wonder is if the Kenne Bell see less efficiencies due to:

1. more rotor lobes
2. oversized rotor shafts, bearings, bolts, gears, and steel pulley

Sure it's heavier duty, but that sounds like more weight to move around.

Certainly food for thought.

Does the new Lysholm or Whipple still has straight-cut gears? The Kenne Bell's one is said to have more sofisticated gears. The Whipple seems to have been re-engineered after the merge. I don't know if they took over some Autorotor elements.

goldNSX said:

Does the new Lysholm or Whipple still has straight-cut gears? The Kenne Bell's one is said to have more sofisticated gears. The Whipple seems to have been re-engineered after the merge. I don't know if they took over some Autorotor elements.

Click to expand...

Dunno about the gears. I see conflicting info about that.

Most of the info says that they are still using the noisier slanted gears that are suppose to be more efficient.

My GTO's roots Magnacharger (Maggie) by Eaton is purported to use straight gears - quieter.

My guess is that the Lysholm have improved. At any rate I never got the impression that reliability with them (or Autorotor) was ever an issue. It more a matter of performance - if that.

Does anyone have a video of the new Lysholm CTSC in action?

Yes, Comptech was having a lot of trouble getting Autorotors and 2 years ago they stated they would probably go to a different supplier. That is the reason for the change. Autorotor was not interested in supporting smaller dealers.

TURBO2GO said:

Autorotor was not interested in supporting smaller dealers.

Click to expand...

I don't understand which dealers they supplied. BATMAN's list is full of big vendors and I do not recall anyone using Autorotor.

BATMANs said:

The Ford GT, Mercedes-Benz SLR McLaren, Mercedes-Benz C32 and SLK32 AMG, Mercedes-Benz E55 AMG, Mazda Millenia S, Koenigsegg CC8S and Mercury Marine engines (Verado series) have Lysholm type superchargers.

Eaton's Roots blowers are seen in the new ZR-1, CTS-V, etc.

Click to expand...

goldNSX said:

I don't understand which dealers they supplied. BATMAN's list is full of big vendors and I do not recall anyone using Autorotor.

Click to expand...

They do supply OEM's from what I understand. I do not know who. Comptech was not placing large enough orders.

goldNSX said:

Does anyone have a video of the new Lysholm CTSC in action?

Click to expand...

Which size Lysholm?

goldNSX said:

I don't understand which dealers they supplied. BATMAN's list is full of big vendors and I do not recall anyone using Autorotor.

Click to expand...

To my knowledge Autorotor blowers were supplied to Kenne Bell.

I'm not sure if there is a contract that made this an exclusive relationship or not.

That, the more expensive manufacturing process, parts, and perhaps, the ability to scale output probably opened the doors wider for Lysholm.

BATMANs said:

Which size Lysholm?

Click to expand...

One of the 1600AX (not AR), the one CT is using now.

goldNSX said:

One of the 1600AX (not AR), the one CT is using now.

Click to expand...

What's the displacement? 2.3?

batmans said:

what's the displacement? 2.3?

Click to expand...

1.6 (1600ax)

I heard from a VERY reliable source that someone is working on a 2.3 liter Lysholm for the NSX.

There's a prototype that's been running around for over a year already with no problemos.

So a 1.6 must be a total joke.

No wonder I didn't waste my mental space with that number.

There's already a good supercharger package out there which is supplied from SOS. It's a 2.1 unit (Kenne Bell AFAIK which would be my favorite one). It would make no sense to me if there would be a 2.3 Lysholm in the very small market like the NSX. Too bad it makes in excess of 380 flywheel horsepower. Too much for my countries regulation.

A 1.6 was standard in all CTSC kit, except for the Autorotor which was a 1.7.

how do they determine the HP in a car in your country?

They have a calibrated dyno. +-2% or so. Stock NSX has 274 engine hp. +40% or 383 engine horsepower are allowed or do make sense.

goldNSX said:

They have a calibrated dyno. +-2% or so. Stock NSX has 274 engine hp. +40% or 383 engine horsepower are allowed or do make sense.

Click to expand...

so how do they find out that u bought and installed a power adder and exactly what that power adder makes in HP?

BATMANs said:

I heard from a VERY reliable source that someone is working on a 2.3 liter Lysholm for the NSX.

There's a prototype that's been running around for over a year already with no problemos.

Click to expand...

For what it's worth, Shane and Mike at Autowave have put together a CT supercharger kit using the 2.3 Lysholm, along with an SOS / Laminova intercooler on my NSX:

http://www.nsxprime.com/forums/showthread.php?t=138029

In our latest chat, we're at 390rwhp on a conservative tune, with great IAT's. (We could do more, but since I have a brand new 3.2 liter engine, respectfully broken in, we're not going to do an engine build just yet -- not at 4,000 miles.)

Evidently, rather than try for >400+ rwhp, we're at 390rwhp all day long.

(FI thermodynamics secret: It's fairly easy to get 400rwhp on the first dyno run... the trick is not to get 380rwhp half an hour later on the freeway, and 360rwhp 45 minutes thereafter. Heat soak = bad. Hence the 2.3 Lysholm, moderately spinning, and the Laminova.)

Hope this helps someone.

Me, it scares...

johntwolff said:

For what it's worth, Shane and Mike at Autowave have put together a CT supercharger kit using the 2.3 Lysholm, along with an SOS / Laminova intercooler on my NSX:

http://www.nsxprime.com/forums/showthread.php?t=138029

In our latest chat, we're at 390rwhp on a conservative tune, with great IAT's. (We could do more, but since I have a brand new 3.2 liter engine, respectfully broken in, we're not going to do an engine build just yet -- not at 4,000 miles.)

Evidently, rather than try for >400+ rwhp, we're at 390rwhp all day long.

(FI thermodynamics secret: It's fairly easy to get 400rwhp on the first dyno run... the trick is not to get 380rwhp half an hour later on the freeway, and 360rwhp 45 minutes thereafter. Heat soak = bad. Hence the 2.3 Lysholm, moderately spinning, and the Laminova.)

Hope this helps someone.

Me, it scares...

Click to expand...

I knew who it was. Just didn't know if I could say it. But heck you did it for me. :tongue:

I think the conservative tune was something like a high 10's:1 A/F ratio. I think 11.5;1 A/F ratio on 91 octane is safe. Certainly safe for the other cars that I've driven on pump.

BATMANs said:

so how do they find out that u bought and installed a power adder and exactly what that power adder makes in HP?

Click to expand...

To drive with the thing legally I have to do some tests which are $$$$ but that's my country.

Test 1: hp (their calibrated dyno)
Test 2: emissions
Test 3: brakes and suspension sufficient?

Don't laugh but these are our rules. More than 40% over stock makes $$$$$ of $$$$. So 40% is economically max.

goldNSX said:

To drive with the thing legally I have to do some tests which are $$$$ but that's my country.

Test 1: hp (their calibrated dyno)
Test 2: emissions
Test 3: brakes and suspension sufficient?

Don't laugh but these are our rules. More than 40% over stock makes $$$$$ of $$$$. So 40% is economically max.

Click to expand...

The suspense is killing us, where do you live?