Notices
2005-2014 Mustangs Discussions on the latest S197 model Mustangs from Ford.
Sponsored by:
Sponsored by:

Which is more economical?

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 05-09-2012, 11:30 AM
  #1  
ZPounds07GT
3rd Gear Member
Thread Starter
 
ZPounds07GT's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Georgia
Posts: 796
Default Which is more economical?

I am really getting to where I want more power in my car but I'm not sure if I should save up forever and get a Supercharger/Turbo or remain Naturally Aspirated.

My car is a daily driver and I want to stay out of the crazy horsepower range, maybe somewhere between 400-450rwhp (400 probably being more realistic). I would like to try and keep some sort of decent MPG as it is my DD and I drive a lot of hwy miles.

If I go with a SC/Turbo, which is more fuel efficient, I figure the Turbo would be more DD friendly with the power being more focused on the higher RPM range. But the main factor is obviously money and the costs of getting to my goal horsepower range.

For a SC/Turbo, I would probably just do gears (3.73 for my auto transmission) and a complete kit for the power adder (injectors, fuel pump, inter-cooler [if necessary without high boost?], etc...)

For NA, I would do LT headers, mid-pipe, cams, intake manifold and gears with everything but the intake manifold being a paid install as I don't know if I trust myself to do the jobs myself in my driveway. Lol.

I guess my main question is which one is better for my goal power and at the lowest cost? Also, I have looked at many different superchargers and turbos and want to know if there is anything that I will not need to support it since I do not want to run so much power (like an inter-cooler)?
ZPounds07GT is offline  
Old 05-09-2012, 11:59 AM
  #2  
808muscle
5th Gear Member
 
808muscle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Maui
Posts: 4,752
Default

I tried the long tubes,cams, 4.10 gears bolt on route with my auto. Forget it, it's not enough power. You are way better off adding a supercharger. An m90 will get you around 400 and not kill your mpg. 400 NA is hard to do and will cost way more than adding a blower.
808muscle is offline  
Old 05-09-2012, 12:00 PM
  #3  
jdmcbride
4th Gear Member
 
jdmcbride's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Palm Beach to South Carolina
Posts: 1,567
Default

You will spend more than the cost of a supercharger to get your car above 400rwhp N/A. And it won't be a daily driver friendly car either. JMO
jdmcbride is offline  
Old 05-09-2012, 12:01 PM
  #4  
BlackGT45th
2nd Gear Member
 
BlackGT45th's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Missouri
Posts: 380
Default

Both comments above are valid and I agree.
BlackGT45th is offline  
Old 05-09-2012, 12:07 PM
  #5  
onederful100
6th Gear Member
 
onederful100's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Honolulu, HI
Posts: 6,130
Default

SC.
theres a lot of SC choices.
any SC will be fuel efficient as long as you dont boost it all over the place.
onederful100 is offline  
Old 05-09-2012, 12:20 PM
  #6  
ZPounds07GT
3rd Gear Member
Thread Starter
 
ZPounds07GT's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Georgia
Posts: 796
Default

Alright. Well I have looked at all different kinds, Hellion, Vortech, Procharger, KB, On3, Roush.. the list goes on but they all seem to be pretty much the same thing and even fewer come as a complete kit for the 2009.. which mine is of course. Plus it's an automatic..

Since I don't want much power is there anything I can do without in a kit? I see many "tuner" kits available for cheap and they give you the ability to pick the additional parts needed. I don't know what is really needed to make it work properly though.

Are injectors, stronger fuel pumps and inter-coolers always needed or are they only needed if you want to reach certain power levels and temps.
ZPounds07GT is offline  
Old 05-09-2012, 12:40 PM
  #7  
onederful100
6th Gear Member
 
onederful100's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Honolulu, HI
Posts: 6,130
Default

the injectors and plugs you will need no matter what.
intercooler is a good idea, but not necessary for around 400 hp.
fuel pump not necessary for 400 hp either.
if you are wanting to be economical, the M90 is a good choice.
or a non-IC paxton or vortech are cheap.
onederful100 is offline  
Old 05-09-2012, 12:48 PM
  #8  
ZPounds07GT
3rd Gear Member
Thread Starter
 
ZPounds07GT's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Georgia
Posts: 796
Default

Originally Posted by onederful100
the injectors and plugs you will need no matter what.
intercooler is a good idea, but not necessary for around 400 hp.
fuel pump not necessary for 400 hp either.
if you are wanting to be economical, the M90 is a good choice.
or a non-IC paxton or vortech are cheap.
I would prefer not to hear a whole lot of whine from the SC, I like to hear the exhaust more. Does the loudness depend on the boost level, because I hear the M90 has a lot of whine?

Oh, and can Bama do a tune for me on the M90 or the Vortech?
ZPounds07GT is offline  
Old 05-09-2012, 01:07 PM
  #9  
onederful100
6th Gear Member
 
onederful100's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Honolulu, HI
Posts: 6,130
Default

http://www.americanmuscle.com/notune.html

this is what AM does not tune for.
onederful100 is offline  
Old 05-09-2012, 01:36 PM
  #10  
ZPounds07GT
3rd Gear Member
Thread Starter
 
ZPounds07GT's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Georgia
Posts: 796
Default

So basically for a Bama tune I would be stuck with the Roush M90 with Ford Racing Injectors?

Thanks for the link, I didn't know they had that list, but then again I never really looked for what they do not tune for..

For those that said it was not enough power and that it would not be DD friendly, why not do you say that?
ZPounds07GT is offline  


Quick Reply: Which is more economical?



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 04:11 AM.