s/c dilemma...roots or centrifugal
02-02-2008, 12:36 PM
#21
5th Gear Member
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Seattle, WA
Posts: 3,696
RE: s/c dilemma...roots or centrifugal
I have actually seen a car do a dyno with 19's making 380, then redynoed with 17s and made a bit over 400. Same day, same dyno too.
Engine power is not affected, but RWHP is affected. It is like changing the pulleys. You are not making the engine more powerful, you are just allowing more of it to be transfered to the wheels.
For the main discussion, the last ProCharger dyno I saw was like 350rwhp on a Mustang Dyno. Car had LT headers and duals. I am hoping that I can get my auto to do similar numbers with a few bolt ons up my sleeve, and I think the goal very possible. I am not gunna talk about the X anymore, because it sends people up in flames, but I think it is crazy that they always shut down N/A people who say that centri's are better saying that "you are not F/I, dont talk!". Then they go and bash centri's.... They know just as much about centri's as the N/A guys knew about roots!! lol!!
Engine power is not affected, but RWHP is affected. It is like changing the pulleys. You are not making the engine more powerful, you are just allowing more of it to be transfered to the wheels.
For the main discussion, the last ProCharger dyno I saw was like 350rwhp on a Mustang Dyno. Car had LT headers and duals. I am hoping that I can get my auto to do similar numbers with a few bolt ons up my sleeve, and I think the goal very possible. I am not gunna talk about the X anymore, because it sends people up in flames, but I think it is crazy that they always shut down N/A people who say that centri's are better saying that "you are not F/I, dont talk!". Then they go and bash centri's.... They know just as much about centri's as the N/A guys knew about roots!! lol!!
02-02-2008, 02:31 PM
#22
5th Gear Member
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 2,006
RE: s/c dilemma...roots or centrifugal
I hope you're not referring to MY post; I never said ANYTHING bad about centri's and won't. I just said don't take advice from somewith NO FI experience at all. PersonallyI don't give a **** if you bolt a Turbonator on your car.
ORIGINAL: chrisc
I have actually seen a car do a dyno with 19's making 380, then redynoed with 17s and made a bit over 400. Same day, same dyno too.
Engine power is not affected, but RWHP is affected. It is like changing the pulleys. You are not making the engine more powerful, you are just allowing more of it to be transfered to the wheels.
For the main discussion, the last ProCharger dyno I saw was like 350rwhp on a Mustang Dyno. Car had LT headers and duals. I am hoping that I can get my auto to do similar numbers with a few bolt ons up my sleeve, and I think the goal very possible. I am not gunna talk about the X anymore, because it sends people up in flames, but I think it is crazy that they always shut down N/A people who say that centri's are better saying that "you are not F/I, dont talk!". Then they go and bash centri's.... They know just as much about centri's as the N/A guys knew about roots!! lol!!
I have actually seen a car do a dyno with 19's making 380, then redynoed with 17s and made a bit over 400. Same day, same dyno too.
Engine power is not affected, but RWHP is affected. It is like changing the pulleys. You are not making the engine more powerful, you are just allowing more of it to be transfered to the wheels.
For the main discussion, the last ProCharger dyno I saw was like 350rwhp on a Mustang Dyno. Car had LT headers and duals. I am hoping that I can get my auto to do similar numbers with a few bolt ons up my sleeve, and I think the goal very possible. I am not gunna talk about the X anymore, because it sends people up in flames, but I think it is crazy that they always shut down N/A people who say that centri's are better saying that "you are not F/I, dont talk!". Then they go and bash centri's.... They know just as much about centri's as the N/A guys knew about roots!! lol!!
02-02-2008, 03:45 PM
#23
3rd Gear Member
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Rancho Cucamonga, CA
Posts: 855
RE: s/c dilemma...roots or centrifugal
Nobody said anything about X-Chargers being better than Centri's. Several X owners have merely pointed out reliability related facts surrounding Eaton S/Cs. Since no one has seen an X with an intercooler we have no idea what kind of power it will produce, so speculation is pointless until we see hard data. I can say that I have heard of several problems with Centri S/C that I have never heard of or experienced with the X. Maybe time will tell but currently I'll stick with the reliability of my set-up over the extreme performance of some others.
02-02-2008, 04:37 PM
#24
5th Gear Member
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location:
Posts: 2,365
RE: s/c dilemma...roots or centrifugal
ORIGINAL: fazm
roots blowers do not build max boost at 2k rpm. probably about 4-6psi at that rpm, then will slowly build to peak boost around like 3500-4000, and level off til you shift.
roots blowers do not build max boost at 2k rpm. probably about 4-6psi at that rpm, then will slowly build to peak boost around like 3500-4000, and level off til you shift.
And I want to say sorry again for the wrong info before. Reliability I said was better for a centri b/c they reach max boost at redline and how often do people hit redline in everyday traffic? (I incorporate passing on the highway and other quick accelerating manuevers as everyday driving).But now I am not surefrom having wrong #'s. I still thinkthereliability of an intercooled f/icar will alwaysbe better than the reliability of a non-intercooled f/i car with similar style/safe tunes.
From the testing of the intercooler's for the x-charger, it looks like it will produce similar rw#'s to intercooled centri's. And anyone who says a similarly modded non-ic x can beat a similarly modded ic-vortech in the quarter is just insane.You think a car putting out 40rwhp and 30rwtorque~more than another car is going to lose tothe lowerrwhp onein the 1/4 mile? (with equaldrivers) It's just not logical. So anyone that thinks, I believe is highly overrating thex-charger. Yes,it'sa very good supercharger for the street/low-end powerand a respectable track performer. But it is what it is. It is not ungodly, and can be beat in the 1/4 witha similarly modded,intercooled vortech supercharged 4.0. It's been proven over and over in the 1/4 times if anyone takes a look(this site isn'tgood for 1/4's time sincethe 2 centri times wehave are by a convertible-which supposedlyis slower4-5 tenths in 1/4 times due to weight and other things and the othercentri is P&P w/a cam(I advise checking 4.0 collective and other mustang forums for them)). And if this rpm building thing to 4k rpm is true about the x-chargers, than a11-14psi(driven by someone who neverwot)intercooled centri may have as much low end power andfeelas a 2.8" pulley non-ic x, be as cheap as the x, be abetter 1/4 performer,and have similar reliability including the factthat you don't wot your car a good amount of times. Anyone driven similar set-ups to what I'm talking about, because on paper it makes sense.
I believe the x isan overpriced fun street supercharger and gave such a godly reputation b/c the majority of supercharged people here own thex
. It is seen in posts by people who don't even own x's all the time. So now, if stated above paragraph last couple sentences are true (according to paper-pretty close), then if you had the choice of a 330rwhp car or a290rwhp car, which would you choose?Same price, similar driving feel, and similar reliability. Not to mention the higherrwhp one is an obvious better track performer-mod 4 mod, psi 4 psi(not intercooler for intercooler, that's not the question, it's ic-vortech vs non-ic x).
02-02-2008, 05:26 PM
#25
5th Gear Member
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Cumming, GA
Posts: 2,460
RE: s/c dilemma...roots or centrifugal
X-Charger Looks better ... Sounds Better ... and is easier on the engine. I personally am happy with the HP on mine .... 330 RWHP is almost 400 HP at the crank ... and folks start breaking engines and the weak manual transmissions in the V6 S197. If I was drag racing and didn't mind possibly breaking things and building them stronger ... I would want as much HP as possible and go with a intercooled centri or better yet a Turbo ... but since most of us use our cars a DD or semi-DD ... the X-Charger is more than enough for the street ... IMHO ...
02-02-2008, 06:13 PM
#26
3rd Gear Member
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Rancho Cucamonga, CA
Posts: 855
RE: s/c dilemma...roots or centrifugal
ORIGINAL: SteelStang05
Ok, I first heard someone tell me in another thread that the x reaches max boost at 2k rpm~ and now am told it's between 3k-4k rpm. Will someone please give me an exact or almost exact rpm for the x's max psi?
And I want to say sorry again for the wrong info before. Reliability I said was better for a centri b/c they reach max boost at redline and how often do people hit redline in everyday traffic? (I incorporate passing on the highway and other quick accelerating manuevers as everyday driving).But now I am not surefrom having wrong #'s. I still thinkthereliability of an intercooled f/icar will alwaysbe better than the reliability of a non-intercooled f/i car with similar style/safe tunes.
From the testing of the intercooler's for the x-charger, it looks like it will produce similar rw#'s to intercooled centri's. And anyone who says a similarly modded non-ic x can beat a similarly modded ic-vortech in the quarter is just insane.You think a car putting out 40rwhp and 30rwtorque~more than another car is going to lose tothe lowerrwhp onein the 1/4 mile? (with equaldrivers) It's just not logical. So anyone that thinks, I believe is highly overrating thex-charger. Yes,it'sa very good supercharger for the street/low-end powerand a respectable track performer. But it is what it is. It is not ungodly, and can be beat in the 1/4 witha similarly modded,intercooled vortech supercharged 4.0. It's been proven over and over in the 1/4 times if anyone takes a look(this site isn'tgood for 1/4's time sincethe 2 centri times wehave are by a convertible-which supposedlyis slower4-5 tenths in 1/4 times due to weight and other things and the othercentri is P&P w/a cam(I advise checking 4.0 collective and other mustang forums for them)). And if this rpm building thing to 4k rpm is true about the x-chargers, than a11-14psi(driven by someone who neverwot)intercooled centri may have as much low end power andfeelas a 2.8" pulley non-ic x, be as cheap as the x, be abetter 1/4 performer,and have similar reliability including the factthat you don't wot your car a good amount of times. Anyone driven similar set-ups to what I'm talking about, because on paper it makes sense.
I believe the x isan overpriced fun street supercharger and gave such a godly reputation b/c the majority of supercharged people here own thex. It is seen in posts by people who don't even own x's all the time. So now, if stated above paragraph last couple sentences are true (according to paper-pretty close), then if you had the choice of a 330rwhp car or a290rwhp car, which would you choose?Same price, similar driving feel, and similar reliability. Not to mention the higherrwhp one is an obvious better track performer-mod 4 mod, psi 4 psi(not intercooler for intercooler, that's not the question, it's ic-vortech vs non-ic x).
ORIGINAL: fazm
roots blowers do not build max boost at 2k rpm. probably about 4-6psi at that rpm, then will slowly build to peak boost around like 3500-4000, and level off til you shift.
roots blowers do not build max boost at 2k rpm. probably about 4-6psi at that rpm, then will slowly build to peak boost around like 3500-4000, and level off til you shift.
And I want to say sorry again for the wrong info before. Reliability I said was better for a centri b/c they reach max boost at redline and how often do people hit redline in everyday traffic? (I incorporate passing on the highway and other quick accelerating manuevers as everyday driving).But now I am not surefrom having wrong #'s. I still thinkthereliability of an intercooled f/icar will alwaysbe better than the reliability of a non-intercooled f/i car with similar style/safe tunes.
From the testing of the intercooler's for the x-charger, it looks like it will produce similar rw#'s to intercooled centri's. And anyone who says a similarly modded non-ic x can beat a similarly modded ic-vortech in the quarter is just insane.You think a car putting out 40rwhp and 30rwtorque~more than another car is going to lose tothe lowerrwhp onein the 1/4 mile? (with equaldrivers) It's just not logical. So anyone that thinks, I believe is highly overrating thex-charger. Yes,it'sa very good supercharger for the street/low-end powerand a respectable track performer. But it is what it is. It is not ungodly, and can be beat in the 1/4 witha similarly modded,intercooled vortech supercharged 4.0. It's been proven over and over in the 1/4 times if anyone takes a look(this site isn'tgood for 1/4's time sincethe 2 centri times wehave are by a convertible-which supposedlyis slower4-5 tenths in 1/4 times due to weight and other things and the othercentri is P&P w/a cam(I advise checking 4.0 collective and other mustang forums for them)). And if this rpm building thing to 4k rpm is true about the x-chargers, than a11-14psi(driven by someone who neverwot)intercooled centri may have as much low end power andfeelas a 2.8" pulley non-ic x, be as cheap as the x, be abetter 1/4 performer,and have similar reliability including the factthat you don't wot your car a good amount of times. Anyone driven similar set-ups to what I'm talking about, because on paper it makes sense.
I believe the x isan overpriced fun street supercharger and gave such a godly reputation b/c the majority of supercharged people here own thex
. It is seen in posts by people who don't even own x's all the time. So now, if stated above paragraph last couple sentences are true (according to paper-pretty close), then if you had the choice of a 330rwhp car or a290rwhp car, which would you choose?Same price, similar driving feel, and similar reliability. Not to mention the higherrwhp one is an obvious better track performer-mod 4 mod, psi 4 psi(not intercooler for intercooler, that's not the question, it's ic-vortech vs non-ic x).
02-02-2008, 06:41 PM
#27
5th Gear Member
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 2,006
RE: s/c dilemma...roots or centrifugal
@Steelstang: I'm going to call Dave at EE and pay him NOT to sell you an X-Charger! I wondered in the past why everybody thought you were such an ***; now I know. Something for you to consider: It is better to remain silent and be thought a fool than to speak and remove all doubt.
02-02-2008, 07:22 PM
#28
5th Gear Member
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Seattle, WA
Posts: 3,696
RE: s/c dilemma...roots or centrifugal
ORIGINAL: dmhines
X-Charger Looks better ... Sounds Better ... and is easier on the engine.
X-Charger Looks better ... Sounds Better ... and is easier on the engine.
How is it easier on the engine?
1) Makes more boost at lower RPM...more time in boost, meaning more pressure and heat
2) Non cooled.....MUCH more heat
3) Roots run hotter than centris.....heat again
If you want to argue with me on point 1 saying something along the lines of "it is boost and RPMs that hurt, not just boost"...here is my rebuttal...
Boost does hurt, just not as much as boost at high RPMs. Sure the centris and turbos need to get into the higher RPMs to boost, so the time in boost is hard on the engine. However, the roots chargers still go to those high RPM levels. It is not like they chill in low RPMs with high boost when racing. The only time that you are really seeing those extra psi's are during the first split seconds of the race, and when you are driving on the street. Boosting means heating also...which is also not a very great thing for the engine. More boost on the street = more heat on the street. Sure there is the BPV, but anybody with a gauge knows that it will open up pretty easily. The BPV is not like a WOT switch with nitrous (as many people with X's seem to believe). As I said earlier, you see the higher boost for the few extra split seconds, and that is great for a race car.
And everybody, please dont confuse what I am saying as a Vortech vs X statement, it is just a centri vs roots (the older style, now they have those cool 4 lobe designs) statement.
ORIGINAL: pat6674u
Nobody said anything about X-Chargers being better than Centri's. Several X owners have merely pointed out reliability related facts surrounding Eaton S/Cs.
Nobody said anything about X-Chargers being better than Centri's. Several X owners have merely pointed out reliability related facts surrounding Eaton S/Cs.
Somebody also mentioned price...
Vortech Supercharger Kit with Aftercooler for 2005-2006 Ford Mustang with 4.0L V6 (V-2 SQ-Trim, satin)
SuperchargersOnline.com*: $4,149.00
Vortech Supercharger Kit for 2005-2006 Ford Mustang with 4.0L V6 (V-2 SQ-Trim, satin)
SuperchargersOnline.com*: $3,299.00
(Those are the full kits, tuner, injects, etc)
X-CHARGER 05-07 Mustang 4.0 SOHC HI-PO with tuner
Price: $4,295.95
X-CHARGER 05-07 Mustang 4.0 SOHC CA spec with tuner
Price: $3,995.95
The cheap Vortech make 260rwhp at 8psi on my auto. Only a JBA muffler. Also, a lot of people running the higher numbers with the X are spraying meth...that was done with no means of cooling at all.
I just realized, the Aftercooler Vortech is cheaper than the Xcharger!! LOL
02-02-2008, 07:42 PM
#29
5th Gear Member
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location:
Posts: 2,365
RE: s/c dilemma...roots or centrifugal
ORIGINAL: dmhines
X-Charger Looks better ... Sounds Better ... and is easier on the engine. I personally am happy with the HP on mine .... 330 RWHP is almost 400 HP at the crank ... and folks start breaking engines and the weak manual transmissions in the V6 S197. If I was drag racing and didn't mind possibly breaking things and building them stronger ... I would want as much HP as possible and go with a intercooled centri or better yet a Turbo ... but since most of us use our cars a DD or semi-DD ... the X-Charger is more than enough for the street ... IMHO ...
X-Charger Looks better ... Sounds Better ... and is easier on the engine. I personally am happy with the HP on mine .... 330 RWHP is almost 400 HP at the crank ... and folks start breaking engines and the weak manual transmissions in the V6 S197. If I was drag racing and didn't mind possibly breaking things and building them stronger ... I would want as much HP as possible and go with a intercooled centri or better yet a Turbo ... but since most of us use our cars a DD or semi-DD ... the X-Charger is more than enough for the street ... IMHO ...
I never made false allegations about x-charger owners saying they're cars weren't better. Whenever I see a what supercharger is better or which supercharger should I get thread, there is always at least 3-4 x-charger owners convincing them to buy one without even explaining to them what the other types of choices do. I think it's wrong for people to buy something based onone's word. That's why I did myresearch and clearly found the intercooled vortech is more reliable, easier on the engine, makes a noticable amountmore rwhp(quicker),has cooler inlet temp's, is the same price(hi-po kit-makes 20rwhp more than cali kit to let everyone know),and sounds cooler(like a jet-my preference)than the hi-po x-charger. It's plain and simple. I just wanted to bring up what I have researched andseen on these forums with the x-charger,the vortech supercharger, and some ofthe x-men. I'm out, Idon't care if x-men hate me now because I have shown people the light of centri's. Whatever yousay about me I don't care. And you were right, you did jump on me forsaying what should be said. Without the group buys, x-chargers are overpriced, slower than intercooled vortechs, more stressful on the engine,not as safe as vortech's, and createa NOTICABLE amount of less power. Shoot me for telling people what you guys never told them aboutcentri's/vortech's.I'm the first person to finally let them know aboutthem, what they can do,and your mad for some reason?
02-02-2008, 07:50 PM
#30
2nd Gear Member
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location:
Posts: 172
RE: s/c dilemma...roots or centrifugal
I think it's wrong for people to buy something based onone's word.