Vortech Supercharger

[catharsis]

Originally Posted by Opposed

Maybe large turbo applications, but not what is currently out for this vehicle. And with a centrifigul supercharger, yes, the power will be linear, but it won't make any of that power until the higher end of the RPM band. I know on the S2k's the Vortec's don't even start seeing boost until about 4.5-5k rpms. The power on a turbo will always come on faster than a centrifigul, especially for this car. We don't have a large volume V8 with gobbs of torque to keep us happy until the boost comes on. I don't understand why "turbo lag" is still talked about. This isn't an 86 Mitsubishi Starion. Yes, high boost, large tubo applications will have plenty of lag. But most of the kits for this car are aiming for quick throttle response and a smooth torque curve that still pulls all the way to redline.

Centrifigul superchargers are very similar to turbos in their operation, design, and nature so you will experience the same problems. Not a fan of them. But no matter what a turbo will lag. Sorry fellas its a myth that they don't. They have to spool to make power, the only way around that is a costly and damaging anti lag system. Before the spool, the car feels like a plain jane stock car, and then you get the surge of power after spool. It's never linear.

Originally Posted by bakerr6

This kind of comment is what turns people off from buying a product, based off fiction. If you have a properly sized turbo, you should not experience much lag, if any at all.

Neither one of your statements are valid, as while SC can be easier to install, they can add additional stress to engine components, which can cause sooner service intervals.

Turns people off? Nothing I said was false. Again read my above post. Turbos spool to make power, before spool their is lag. SC's typically are less stressful on the motor because they are very PSI limited, people tend to push turbo systems to hard and that's when things go boom.


Someone will make an eaton blower work for this car, and it'll be the best FI kit for it. In my personal opinion. Due to the reasons I stated above.

[wootwoot]

I for one prefer the response of a turbo. If you keep the RPM's low the car behaves like it's stock. This is a good thing, in my mind, as the motor isn't under boost when you are getting groceries or whatever. When you want the power simply push the throttle down a little bit more and hang on. You also don't have to drive the supercharger everywhere you go.

As far as boost goes, 8psi is 8psi no matter if it is from a turbo or SC. Not sure how you are claiming a SC is less stressful on the motor with all things being equal.... Seems like the SC would be more stressful just because the motor has to drive it as opposed to the exhaust.

[bakerr6]

Originally Posted by catharsis

Centrifigul superchargers are very similar to turbos in their operation, design, and nature so you will experience the same problems. Not a fan of them. But no matter what a turbo will lag. Sorry fellas its a myth that they don't. They have to spool to make power, the only way around that is a costly and damaging anti lag system. Before the spool, the car feels like a plain jane stock car, and then you get the surge of power after spool. It's never linear.

Turns people off? Nothing I said was false. Again read my above post. Turbos spool to make power, before spool their is lag. SC's typically are less stressful on the motor because they are very PSI limited, people tend to push turbo systems to hard and that's when things go boom.


Someone will make an eaton blower work for this car, and it'll be the best FI kit for it. In my personal opinion. Due to the reasons I stated above.

I don't think you understand. From a theory standpoint, the turbo is easier on the motor than an sc at the same psi, because it is run by exhaust gases, not driven by the motor. With a SC, you are putting stress on the crank, PS pump, alt, etc. since the SC is belt driven. You're saying a turbo is more unreliable because it makes more power? You're not required to turn the boost up, it's just easier to do so.

[wootwoot]

Originally Posted by bakerr6

I don't think you understand. From a theory standpoint, the turbo is easier on the motor than an sc at the same psi, because it is run by exhaust gases, not driven by the motor. With a SC, you are putting stress on the crank, PS pump, alt, etc. since the SC is belt driven. You're saying a turbo is more unreliable because it makes more power? You're not required to turn the boost up, it's just easier to do so.

[PowderfaceTr.]

Turbo oil is hot, really hot. Is much harder on a motor dumping hot oil into it than some additional load to the belt.

[bakerr6]

Originally Posted by PowderfaceTr.

Turbo oil is hot, really hot. Is much harder on a motor dumping hot oil into it than some additional load to the belt.

False again with the cooling features of turnouts that wouldn't be a factor at all

[wootwoot]

Originally Posted by PowderfaceTr.

Turbo oil is hot, really hot. Is much harder on a motor dumping hot oil into it than some additional load to the belt.

Oil cooler = problem solved.

[WolfsFang]

isent their dyno graphs of cars loosing power when not in boost with a SC on the car due to the extra stress on the engine?

[bakerr6]

Originally Posted by WolfsFang

isent their dyno graphs of cars loosing power when not in boost with a SC on the car due to the extra stress on the engine?

The power would be minimal for most setups . I just don't want people misinformed people

[Tradewind]

Originally Posted by WolfsFang

isent their dyno graphs of cars loosing power when not in boost with a SC on the car due to the extra stress on the engine?

Wolfs fang

So me the chart you have seen, just a link to it will be fine

In the attached chart from a Subaru 2.5i engine tuned this week you can see stock, tuned NA and supercharged (6psi) power

Show me where this little motor is suffering from supercharger drive losses before coming on boost as compared to stock, mind you this chart is VERY typical of supercharging a Subaru 4cyl engine

[serialk11r]

Originally Posted by WolfsFang

isent their dyno graphs of cars loosing power when not in boost with a SC on the car due to the extra stress on the engine?

Declutched SC = basically 0 loss. Bypassed but not declutched centri/twin screw SC will cost noticable power, bypassed Roots will cost at most just a few horsepower at maximum speed. Dyno graphs are run at full throttle so the marginal amount of boost produced by a centrifugal SC at lower speed will make up for whatever power it costs to drive the supercharger.

[MANDALAY]

As far as boost goes, 8psi is 8psi no matter if it is from a turbo or SC. Not sure how you are claiming a SC is less stressful on the motor with all things being equal.... Seems like the SC would be more stressful just because the motor has to drive it as opposed to the exhaust.[/QUOTE]


Disagree totally , with you first line.
N/A's Breath without restriction. Adding a SC there will be no change, air will just move even faster ,hence hot combustion gases escape straight away.= cooler fuel in the cylinder.

Turbo is restrictive on the expelled gases , combustion chamber gets hotter = much more prone to Knock.

Basic fundamentals nothing is for free.

SC much more predictable, no runaway boost and heaps less stress on the whole drive train.
Do yourself a favor have a ride in a SC car and you will see how drivable, predictable it is.

FYI the 2012 drifting champion over here was a Rotrex SC Nissan 350 Z

No matter what turbo it has lag and all these comments of properly matched is garbage , i don't car what they say.
With the SC you just add the biggest unit you can and which the engine will handle, no mystery no surprises

[bakerr6]

Originally Posted by MANDALAY

As far as boost goes, 8psi is 8psi no matter if it is from a turbo or SC. Not sure how you are claiming a SC is less stressful on the motor with all things being equal.... Seems like the SC would be more stressful just because the motor has to drive it as opposed to the exhaust.

Disagree totally , with you first line.
N/A's Breath without restriction. Adding a SC there will be no change, air will just move even faster ,hence hot combustion gases escape straight away.= cooler fuel in the cylinder.

Turbo is restrictive on the expelled gases , combustion chamber gets hotter = much more prone to Knock.

Basic fundamentals nothing is for free.

SC much more predictable, no runaway boost and heaps less stress on the whole drive train.
Do yourself a favor have a ride in a SC car and you will see how drivable, predictable it is.

FYI the 2012 drifting champion over here was a Rotrex SC Nissan 350 Z

No matter what turbo it has lag and all these comments of properly matched is garbage , i don't car what they say.
With the SC you just add the biggest unit you can and which the engine will handle, no mystery no surprises[/QUOTE]

Completely inaccurate. Turbos force air into the motor that was previously hotter temps, but once going through the ic, in many cases it can actually be cooler than the air incoming from a sc. A sc is more restrictive, because the air being forced into the motor is solely reliant on the motor spinning the sc. I have a tc car already (tally is up to 3 now), and have had 2 SC cars. While I do enjoy both, passing along bad info. is not something I take lightly when looking at FI, which is what you and some of these other fanboys are doing.

[TouchMyHonda]

In for moar