S/C and Turbo limits

[Ant]

given both could be put on the SAME CAR, with an IDENTICAL SETUP OTHERWISE, what could handle for pressure, an S/C or a turbo. My guess would be a turbo, becuse there are less moving parts (less stuff to break). But then again, I no little about either, but am curious.

[phantom505]

What is the point here?

You can get both that will support well over 30 psi.

[95-GT]

I think he might be referring to how much could the stock internals and valvetrain handle with each setup.

[phantom505]

The real question is, where do you get an engine that can handle that much pressure?

Most engines seem to top out around 20 psi.

[95-GT]

There are also other factors too, like turbo size. Like our engine stock could handle up to 12 lbs of boost, but take a srt-4 or mustang cobra, they handle up to 20-22 lbs of boost.

[phantom505]

With a good tune and correct A/F ratio I bet we can push more. However, most people try using voodoo like FMU's so they can't go any higher. The pistons might be a bit weak, but I think they can handle a little more. I can't do it on my daily driver, but I'm willing to bet you could run 15 if were careful.

[95-GT]

I bet we could, but I also bet that the motor couldnt last that long either. I'll be going with a safe but nice 8 lbs for daily and 12 lbs for race only. My goal is between 300-350 whp when its all said and done.

[Ant]

Originally posted by 95-GT
I think he might be referring to how much could the stock internals and valvetrain handle with each setup.

yeah. I figured this would be a nice discussion. i personally see an S/C as a "safer" setup. dunno why...

Originally posted by AntTheGreat
yeah. I figured this would be a nice discussion. i personally see an S/C as a "safer" setup. dunno why...

There are both, pros and cons, with both setups. It is a matter of personal preference. The SC is power on demand with no lag, the Turbo has a little lag,but is a little better on the Top End power than the SC. As long as the prep work is done before the install and a stricter maintenance schedule is followed, there shouldn't be any problem. Whether the SC is a safer setup, that is hard to say. I will say this, 'Once You Go Boost, You Never Go Back To N/A'.

[phantom505]

Turbo lag is a myth if you build it up properly. If you ever get a chance to ride in my car you'll see why "turbo lag" is such a joke and very inappropriate.

I full boost at partial throttle, maybe 50%ish.

[FORTEEN3GT]

Originally posted by KmanGT1

I will say this, 'Once You Go Boost, You Never Go Back To N/A'.

cuz a turbo or sc kit is a bitch to take off!!

[aleroboy]

Originally posted by KmanGT1
There are both, pros and cons, with both setups. It is a matter of personal preference. The SC is power on demand with no lag, the Turbo has a little lag,but is a little better on the Top End power than the SC. As long as the prep work is done before the install and a stricter maintenance schedule is followed, there shouldn't be any problem. Whether the SC is a safer setup, that is hard to say. I will say this, 'Once You Go Boost, You Never Go Back To N/A'.

lag and top end with a turbo depends on the size of the turbo.
dsm's have no lag really stock but a poor top end because the turbo is soo small.
and there are some sc's capable or some insane top end too
a vortech style sc produces more top end than it does anything else. but it really has lag down low.
a roots type has no lag but a week top end.
twin screw sc's started as industrial use and can build over 200 psi.
the have a great bottom end but dont wall flat like a roots type does.

[aleroboy]

Originally posted by phantom505
Turbo lag is a myth if you build it up properly. If you ever get a chance to ride in my car you'll see why "turbo lag" is such a joke and very inappropriate.

I full boost at partial throttle, maybe 50%ish.

lag does exzist
My friends rx7 definately had lag. turbo wouldnt spool till 4500 rpm.
Just depends on the size of the turbo and what the goal is with the car.
turbos dont seem to have as wide of an operating range as most of the engines they are put on. they either spool up fast and dont have the top end or they take a while to come into power and have a great top end.
Except on diesels. since most diesels dont turn past 4,000 rpm, on that spools up fast is still in power at the diesel's redline

[phantom505]

Guess you don't like to read people's posts.

I don't have a RX7 and by the time the stall locks I'm boosted.

When I spoke to you on the phone you were telling me that you start off at 5 psi and work up to max boost. I get max boost as soon as the foot hits full throttle.

I think I'll start calling that SC lag.

[aleroboy]

Originally posted by phantom505
Turbo lag is a myth if you build it up properly.

I read your post. this was what I was responding to
lag may not exzist on your car but your power falls before redline
guess we will see what happens when you up the boost.
but I've yet to see a single turbo car have no lag and an insane top end that doesnt fall short

[aleroboy]

Originally posted by phantom505
Guess you don't like to read people's posts.

I don't have a RX7 and by the time the stall locks I'm boosted.

When I spoke to you on the phone you were telling me that you start off at 5 psi and work up to max boost. I get max boost as soon as the foot hits full throttle.

I think I'll start calling that SC lag.

I'd rather have boost that contenues to build as the engine increases in rpm.
Getting all at once is like nitrous. It gets full "boost" as you as you go wot too, then it follows the natural curve of the power band.
so yeah nitrous cars are hell out of the hole but normally supercharged cars pull back on them in the higher rpms.

This is prolly why I decided to go with a whipple.
80% of the boost is available before 2,000 rpm but it contenues to pull into the higher rpms and wont cavatate because of its design.
if you get a turbo big enough to not fall up top you get lots of lag down low until it comes into power.

[phantom505]

So you keep saying. However I think there must be some reason why Whipples are almost entirely found on trucks. If it's so great then why isn't it on more cars?

[phantom505]

Reading Whipple's site hurts my brain. Centrifuge=Turbo, but a little better, HARDLY! I'll take that statement to the dyno and to the track. Looking at their theortical curve, it's pretty much what mine looks like. I would like to see HP vs. RPM or speed though. I'm guessing that the cam will limit power, just like it does on the turbos.

I would love to tear apart the crap on that table, but I'm not going to waste my time. Let's just say that their retoric sounds good, but I don't think it will perform the way they claim it would. Let me guess, the ENTIRE race industry just happened to MISS out on the Whipple's advantages in EVERY catagory.

Riiiigggghhht, and I'll get you into heaven if you pay me enough.

It's funny how on every Mustang site I go to they promise results on the Whipple and they never carry through. I'm betting it looks just a like a curve on a turbo. Particularly on an automatic.

[phantom505]

If this is the power curve (as admitted by this slightly more honest site), I have little to worry about:

http://www.coloradocobras.com/whippl...ipple-faq.html

It barely beats a centrifuge in that pic, it's about 75% of the way down.

[aleroboy]

Originally posted by phantom505
So you keep saying. However I think there must be some reason why Whipples are almost entirely found on trucks. If it's so great then why isn't it on more cars?

Whipple doesn't offer many systems for car except custom stuff done outside whipple
one I know of is for the nsx and honestly havent looked into it much.
twin screw superchargers are pretty new to the automotive world
Ford chose a twin scew for the new GT and it produces 500hp.
kenne bell does a bit more with cars.
from what I'm told they have a blowzilla available for the GTP and its suspose dot be a pretty good setup.
Muscle mustangs and fast fords had a new cobra up to 600+ horse on 17 psi with a kenne bell blowzilla upgrade.