Edelbrock vs Jackson Racing

[Calum]

Originally Posted by Phantobe

550WHP? Highest I've seen was around 400 WHP on both edelbrock & a C38 with HBP. How would 550WHP be achievable?

I'm guessing you're referring to the limit of the supercharger itself...

Head porting would be my guess. For some reason people don't talk about porting much on this forum.

[gtengr]

Originally Posted by Calum

Head porting would be my guess. For some reason people don't talk about porting much on this forum.

It may not make much of an improvement. The heads already have to flow pretty good to make +100 HP/L stock.

[Calum]

Originally Posted by gtengr

It may not make much of an improvement. The heads already have to flow pretty good to make +100 HP/L stock.

A couple of people have posted flow bench numbers. From what I understand the heads do flow really well, but the problem is they lack flow velocity. Someone was playing with filling in certain areas of the ports and getting great results, but I haven't seen him post in ages now.

[CSG Mike]

Originally Posted by Phantobe

550WHP? Highest I've seen was around 400 WHP on both edelbrock & a C38 with HBP. How would 550WHP be achievable?

I'm guessing you're referring to the limit of the supercharger itself...

Clients that compete with their cars typically ask us not to post their details online. If your're serious about such a setup, set up a consultation with CSG.

[CSG Mike]

Originally Posted by gtengr

It may not make much of an improvement. The heads already have to flow pretty good to make +100 HP/L stock.

FA20 heads are only about 25 years behind Honda heads.

[gtengr]

Originally Posted by Calum

A couple of people have posted flow bench numbers. From what I understand the heads do flow really well, but the problem is they lack flow velocity. Someone was playing with filling in certain areas of the ports and getting great results, but I haven't seen him post in ages now.

Sounds like I have some more research to do. I've done a lot of reading but haven't seen much on the heads and cams.

Originally Posted by CSG Mike

FA20 heads are only about 25 years behind Honda heads.

That bad huh

[CSG Mike]

Originally Posted by gtengr

Sounds like I have some more research to do. I've done a lot of reading but haven't seen much on the heads and cams.



That bad huh

Well, to be fair, Honda pretty much destroys everyone in that aspect of engines, including Porsche and Ferrari.

[mrg666]

Originally Posted by CSG Mike

1. Both kits tap out at approximately 550whp, with a full host of supporting mods. Driveability is not determined by the kit, but rather, the tune that ties all the parts together.

2. The JRSC is a shorter install; the Edelbrock kit ultimately breaks down into a lot of simple steps. The Edelbrock really requires 2 people to safely put the manifold on the engine (and only for this step).

3. The Edelbrock kit is superior for bursts of power and competitive Autox (water can absorb heat faster than air), but the JRSC is superior for long term sustained power on track (air holds less heat to be dissipated). If you're not looking for every last bit of power, than this is moot.

4. Again, your power level will dictate reliability, not the kit. Both kits are rock solid reliable.

What I understand from your comments and reading other available info, Edelbrock seems to start boosting at lower rpms and reach the max earlier than JRSC. I personally prefer a more relaxed engine at lower RPMS and increasing boost at higher RPMS thinking that the engine will not be strained as much in daily driving. And I think this could help with wear and mpg. Do you agree with this?

One last question about JRSC, if you don't mind, do you think the heat generated by C38 is less than C30 since it is a larger compressor and rotates at lower rpm? Can this make any difference with intercooler's efficiency? I am about to order the JRSC kit and trying to decide between C38 and C30.

Thank you for all the information you provide in this forum.

[Phantobe]

Originally Posted by mrg666

What I understand from your comments and reading other available info, Edelbrock seems to start boosting at lower rpms and reach the max earlier than JRSC. I personally prefer a more relaxed engine at lower RPMS and increasing boost at higher RPMS thinking that the engine will not be strained as much in daily driving. And I think this could help with wear and mpg. Do you agree with this?

One last question about JRSC, if you don't mind, do you think the heat generated by C38 is less than C30 since it is a larger compressor and rotates at lower rpm? Can this make any difference with intercooler's efficiency? I am about to order the JRSC kit and trying to decide between C38 and C30.

Thank you for all the information you provide in this forum.

I plan on deciding between a c38 & c30 not sure on heat generated or efficiency, but here is a good article done by vit he's a tuner on the forums.

It may help you decide....

http://blog.vittuned.com/jackson-rac...ft-86-fr-sbrz/

[mrg666]

Originally Posted by Phantobe

I plan on deciding between a c38 & c30 not sure on heat generated or efficiency, but here is a good article done by vit he's a tuner on the forums.

It may help you decide....

http://blog.vittuned.com/jackson-rac...ft-86-fr-sbrz/

Thanks for the link and thanks to vit for data. Compared to C38, it looks like C30 has extra 10 hp and 12 torque at ~3750 rpms while approximately that much lower at top rpm. This is interesting! I think the rest of the data is even more interesting about the high-boost pulley with C38. The engine was able to reach ~300 whp with just upgraded port injectors.

[CSG Mike]

Originally Posted by mrg666

What I understand from your comments and reading other available info, Edelbrock seems to start boosting at lower rpms and reach the max earlier than JRSC. I personally prefer a more relaxed engine at lower RPMS and increasing boost at higher RPMS thinking that the engine will not be strained as much in daily driving. And I think this could help with wear and mpg. Do you agree with this?

One last question about JRSC, if you don't mind, do you think the heat generated by C38 is less than C30 since it is a larger compressor and rotates at lower rpm? Can this make any difference with intercooler's efficiency? I am about to order the JRSC kit and trying to decide between C38 and C30.

Thank you for all the information you provide in this forum.

Torque is what breaks stuff, so it's not necessarily better to have everything earlier. It really depends on what your goals are.

The C38 is more efficient at the upper range of the RPMs on the CARB calibration/pulley, and really starts to run away in efficiency as you up the boost further with smaller pulleys.

If you find the information useful, order from CSG!

[CSG Mike]

Originally Posted by mrg666

Thanks for the link and thanks to vit for data. Compared to C38, it looks like C30 has extra 10 hp and 12 torque at ~3750 rpms while approximately that much lower at top rpm. This is interesting! I think the rest of the data is even more interesting about the high-boost pulley with C38. The engine was able to reach ~300 whp with just upgraded port injectors.

You should see what happens when a good header is paired up with the JRSC

[AJPG]

Originally Posted by ZionsWrath

Pretty sure that is the point.

If we just go by a spec sheet no one would own this car in the first place I think.

Hi and I disagree

When I buy the the car I knew I could get runout with a matrix or a caravan, and that isn't so bad. Because the car have the really hard part to obtain (an outstanding handling and rwd) as a bonus its gorgeous. All "I need" was some good old FI and call it a day.

[mrg666]

Originally Posted by CSG Mike

You should see what happens when a good header is paired up with the JRSC

Header is probably next I will drive with the carb tune and stock header for a while before that. Don't you think the aftermarket headers make the heat soak more of an issue without the heat shield on the stock header?