Quote:
Originally Posted by glamcem
As the title says I would like hear about your experiences exclusively for track use, and supporting data of any sort would be highly appreciated. And yes, I searched but couldn't find anything other than the subjective opinion(s).
Below are the information I gathered so far on both FI application:
Turbo advantages:- Makes more power at the given boost level (more efficient)
- More low and midrange torque
- Less noise meaning less need for muffler/resonator on the exhaust
- Upgradeability, ability to unleash more power down the road
- Avo kit looks very appealing and simple and has the stock-like appearance ( but at the end it's a turbo)
Turbo disadvantages:- A bit more complex project since it generates more heat which requires more heat insulation to prevent heat soak issues (wraps, turbo blankets, hi-temp coating ..etc)
- Possible lag and unpredictable power delivery (may not be the case for smaller turbo setups)
- Transient response is somewhat delayed even with smaller turbos
- More prone to back pressure so it possibly requires a larger exhaust setup
Rotrex advantages:- More like a "turn-key solution" because of the simplicity and reliability
- Boost builds up as the engine speeds increases so less load on the low RPM levels to the engine (which ultimately affects the reliability), it makes the most power on top end so only when you need it.
- Less heat due to its design (some people claim that they can touch the intake after dyno pulls)
- Linear and predictable power delivery that feels like a higher displacement engine under the hood, better transient response
- KW claims the stock exhaust and header car made 270whp on dynojet which is more than adequate for me
Rotrex disadvantages:
- Lacking the advantages of the turbo ( see above) and
- Possible belt issues (I think it's addressed on the newer kits though)
|
i think it would be good to qualify some of the above statements to more accurately reflect the differences between Rotrex vs Turbo
Turbo advantages:
- Makes more power at the given boost level (more efficient)
** actually this is not true...because the rotrex's high rpm capabilities, it can run compressors with the same efficiencies as turbos. however, at the same boost levels and same piping and intercooler configurations the rotrex should make more power because the charge air temps should be lower. the Rotrex has a maximum operating oil temp of 180F, so compared to the exhaust side of the turbocharger there should be less heat bleeding over to the compressor side. with the rotrex there will be a few hp used to turn the blower, so the question is if the power lost in turning the blower greater or less than the power gained from having cooler charge temps.
-More low and midrange torque
** this depends on the size of the compressor housing. the power on a smaller turbocharger may come much more dramatically at lower rpms, but may also run out of air on the top. but generally speaking the power of a supercharger will come in much more linearly than a supercharger.
Turbo disadvantages:
- A bit more complex project since it generates more heat which requires more heat insulation to prevent heat soak issues (wraps, turbo blankets, hi-temp coating ..etc)
** yeah...turbos run hot hot hot...protecting and managing against the additional heat is paramount
- Possible lag and unpredictable power delivery (may not be the case for smaller turbo setups)
-Transient response is somewhat delayed even with smaller turbos
** yes..the sc responds instantly
Rotrex disadvantages:
- Lacking the advantages of the turbo ( see above)
- Possible belt issues (I think it's addressed on the newer kits though)
** this is more a possible kit developer related issue and not inherent to the Rotrex itself. on the KW kit, the sc belt drive is independent from the engine accesory belt, so even in the case of breakage, you can still drive the vehicle.