centrifugal vs screw-real world applications
#1
centrifugal vs screw-real world applications
Recently, I had some warranty work done on my 02 S281E(twin screw). I am trying to sell my 01 S281(procharged), but drove it while the 02 was in the shop. In daily driving/street application, the screw setup way outshines the centrifugal setup. Not even close. No doubt, the 01 with the procharger(10 psi, dynoed 440rwhp) is impressive. It is pretty fast and pulls hard. -But the 02, with the screw(when it was bone stock it made 400 rwhp w/12psi)pulls so much harder at the hit of the throttle. Yeah, if I drove the 01 around town at 3500 rpm's all the time, it would pull hard at the hit, but that is the last thing I want to do. I'd rather cruise around at 2000 rpms, and have the low end grunt. The more I drive both cars, the more the screw shines. When driving the 01, I find myself waiting for the car to get through the 2000-3000 rpm range an awful lot, to get to the real powerband. That lagtime is a lot more evident after you drive a twin screw car. It's not that the procharged car doesn't impress me, it's just that the twin screw car impresses me that much more. I'm tellin ya right now, once you go screw, you'll never go back. -And i'm not talkin a $ to $ comparison. On a bang for the buck comparison, it's hard to beat the centrifugal price. Product to product, the screw is the winner, time and time again.
_________
02 S281E
_________
02 S281E
#2
RE: centrifugal vs screw-real world applications
I was just reading that the centrifugal was suppose to be better for the engine. Doesn't put as much strain on it and doesn't create as much heat. It was in one of the new Mustang mags where they were test ProChargers new Cobra supercharger. I'll post some more from the article when I get a chance to locate the mag.
#3
RE: centrifugal vs screw-real world applications
The Kenne Bell is efficient, much more so than the Saleen or Cobra Eaton superchargers. Either way, around town a positive displacement s/c is much more fun. Centrifugal is teh frugal though.
#5
RE: centrifugal vs screw-real world applications
The Kenne Bell is efficient, much more so than the Saleen or Cobra Eaton superchargers.
_________
02 S281E
#8
RE: centrifugal vs screw-real world applications
*ahem* twin turbo.... but that's not the point. I've heard centrifigal superchargers are better, but thats interesting info birdieman, I'll have to look into that.
#9
RE: centrifugal vs screw-real world applications
I saw a before and after dyno from a guy going from a Procharger with 10psi boost to a Kenne Belle with 10psi boost, both intercooled. The Procharger made more hp over 5k rpm, peaked at 15 more hp over the Kenne Belle. The Kenne Belle made 100 rwhp over the Procharger at 3k rpm. Pretty staggering eh?
Its borderline who would be faster in the 1/4 mile, the Procharger would definately be easier to drive on the street - especially the rain. All in all I would say for the most part the centrifugal's will be faster in the 1/4 mile all things being equal - especially at higher boost levels. Its all in what you want.
Its borderline who would be faster in the 1/4 mile, the Procharger would definately be easier to drive on the street - especially the rain. All in all I would say for the most part the centrifugal's will be faster in the 1/4 mile all things being equal - especially at higher boost levels. Its all in what you want.
#10
RE: centrifugal vs screw-real world applications
centrifugal is the way to go. all you need is lower gears to overcome the no power in the low rpm problem.
The Kenne Belle made 100 rwhp over the Procharger at 3k rpm. Pretty staggering eh?
All in all I would say for the most part the centrifugal's will be faster in the 1/4 mile all things being equal - especially at higher boost levels. Its all in what you want.
__________
02 S281E