Pipes, Boost & Juice Talk about Exhaust, Nitrous, Blowers, Turbos, Superchargers... whatever makes you go faster!

help choosing a supercharger

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old Sep 9, 2008 | 07:15 PM
  #11  
my94pony's Avatar
my94pony
Thread Starter
4th Gear Member
 
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 1,858
From: Long Island, New York
Default

haha i know turbo turbo, im more interested in the supercharger tho, kyle do u have an exact link to the procharger with the intercooler upgrade ur talking about? im trying to get a price set on so i know what to save up
Old Sep 10, 2008 | 12:08 AM
  #12  
Fobra's Avatar
Fobra
Banned
 
Joined: May 2007
Posts: 4,064
From:
Default

modulars are much more difficult to turbo, but if DIY you can get it done for 3500 or less, using a GOOD turbo, but if you dont have a built motor or plan on one very soon your wasting your time to turbo a modular - it wont last long
Old Sep 10, 2008 | 01:00 PM
  #13  
my94pony's Avatar
my94pony
Thread Starter
4th Gear Member
 
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 1,858
From: Long Island, New York
Default

yeah im not planning on having a built motor this car unfortunately will probably never see the track, im just looking for a good 400-450 hp and 450+ tq which the supercharger should get me
Old Sep 10, 2008 | 05:23 PM
  #14  
FoxGT's Avatar
FoxGT
5th Gear Member
 
Joined: Jul 2003
Posts: 3,451
From: United States
Default

Nothing wrong with staying away from turbo, they're less reliable than superchargers. Another reason I don't recommend them unless you're aiming to get lots of power. I'm not saying they're bad, i haven't had hardly any problems with any kits or my own car but I explain to people what to do & not to do as far as durability & imo they're easy/cheap to rebuild (journal bearing) when they do go bad. But either way you look at it, they are less reliable.

Originally Posted by Fobra
modulars are much more difficult to turbo, but if DIY you can get it done for 3500 or less, using a GOOD turbo, but if you dont have a built motor or plan on one very soon your wasting your time to turbo a modular - it wont last long
Why do you have to have a built engine to go turbo? Quite a few people have turbo'd a stock modular engine without upgrading anything internally.
Old Sep 21, 2008 | 09:35 AM
  #15  
rthouck's Avatar
rthouck
2nd Gear Member
 
Joined: May 2007
Posts: 318
From: North Carolina
Default

get a whipple or a kenne bell, its much more street/strip friendly. Unless you race often thats the way to go.
Old Sep 21, 2008 | 02:38 PM
  #16  
Fobra's Avatar
Fobra
Banned
 
Joined: May 2007
Posts: 4,064
From:
Default

Originally Posted by FoxGT
Nothing wrong with staying away from turbo, they're less reliable than superchargers. Another reason I don't recommend them unless you're aiming to get lots of power. I'm not saying they're bad, i haven't had hardly any problems with any kits or my own car but I explain to people what to do & not to do as far as durability & imo they're easy/cheap to rebuild (journal bearing) when they do go bad. But either way you look at it, they are less reliable.



Why do you have to have a built engine to go turbo? Quite a few people have turbo'd a stock modular engine without upgrading anything internally.

just practical experience. 5.0 guys have had alot better luck with them it seems. I think turbos are fine on modulars, but you need to keep the power lower and get some good tuning. Most if not all modulars that I know of w/o replacing the internals has blown up, now whether that be tuning/driving/too much power, etc. remains to be seen. I think turbos are ok on modulars, but you need to stay under 400 rwhp.
Old Sep 21, 2008 | 02:58 PM
  #17  
Fobra's Avatar
Fobra
Banned
 
Joined: May 2007
Posts: 4,064
From:
Default

Come to think of it, of the 20 or so stock modular turbos that I have seen, only one of them hasn't gone by the wayside
Old Sep 22, 2008 | 10:09 PM
  #18  
brian_jones110's Avatar
brian_jones110
1st Gear Member
 
Joined: Jun 2008
Posts: 96
From: ut
Default

Which one is the most fuel efficient, i know if your putting one in your probli not too worried about fuel efficiency but im just curious.
Old Sep 26, 2008 | 03:09 PM
  #19  
Capstun's Avatar
Capstun
 
Joined: Sep 2007
Posts: 28
From:
Default

I have an 05 and went with a ProCharger. It was installed six months ago. Me and my mechanic are very pleased with the additional 180 HP. It is a daily driver. Also added 4:10's and a Bassani exhaust. Now at 461 HP.
Old Sep 28, 2008 | 02:21 AM
  #20  
FoxGT's Avatar
FoxGT
5th Gear Member
 
Joined: Jul 2003
Posts: 3,451
From: United States
Default

Originally Posted by brian_jones110
Which one is the most fuel efficient, i know if your putting one in your probli not too worried about fuel efficiency but im just curious.
roots are the least impact on your fuel efficiency only if there's a bypass valve. The only reason it will work with a roots is because it's the only one that moves air instead of compressing it. centri, twin-screw, & turbo have a bigger impact on your fuel economy because they're either always compressing air at cruise rpm or blocking exhaust gasses slightly (turbo)

A horribly setup roots kit will have a bad effect on fuel economy though. Also, roots use a butterfly style bypass, not popit style like in turbo & centri supercharged cars.
Related Topics
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
GimpyHSHS
4.6L (1996-2004 Modular) Mustang
19
Dec 19, 2023 01:12 PM
AMAlexLazarus
AmericanMuscle.com
0
Oct 1, 2015 09:21 AM
col2560
V6 (1994-2004) Mustangs
3
Sep 25, 2015 08:59 PM




All times are GMT -5. The time now is 05:42 PM.