What's with this 100K mile crap? I have a Civic with 200K miles, but I'd rather drive the Cobra to work everyday (and do on nice days).
Turbo really better?
- Thread starter DOHC
- Start date
What's with this 100K mile crap? I have a Civic with 200K miles, but I'd rather drive the Cobra to work everyday (and do on nice days).
Not going to go from a dig on the highway. That is 100K (lol) times more dangerous than running through a few gears from a roll.
I did not say from a dig on the highway. It can be done somewhere safer if not the track.
I know someone who have had a KB and he have since gone with a Hellion single turbo set up. I will ask about a ride to see if it is all that much different from when it had a KB. I think they should be close from the digs to quarter mile down the road.
Last edited by a moderator:
Good for you, :bowdown:
Not to mention this:
SCTA C/PS WORLD LAND SPEED RECORD HOLDER: 213.121 MPH
Yep, a positive displacement supercharger was used in this instance, and the guy with this record even think his car can probably hit the 220 range without headwind.
A turbo can be fast if done correctly, but that doesn't mean a positive displacement supercharger is slow by any means!
SCTA C/PS WORLD LAND SPEED RECORD HOLDER: 213.121 MPH
Yep, a positive displacement supercharger was used in this instance, and the guy with this record even think his car can probably hit the 220 range without headwind.
A turbo can be fast if done correctly, but that doesn't mean a positive displacement supercharger is slow by any means!
the turbo is more efficient and less stress on the motor, pound for pound. so I would argue that the motor would last just as long, if not longer than with the PD blower. granted, the reason for going turbo is more power and more boost, so yes, the turbo cause the motor to let go sooner, but like I said, the same boost from the turbo and PD, the turbo I feel would last longer given all other criteria are the same.
I don't think anyone is arguing or stating that the PD is slow.
I don't think anyone is arguing or stating that the PD is slow.
Sure sounds to me like your carrying the S/C bandwagon Norman...I think what most people are saying on here is that if you plan on making big power #'s, then your better off going turbo because your going to have to spend major $$ either way to have a reliable setup and with a turbo, you don't have a parasetic leach. The advantage of going S/C is that if your goals aren't too crazy, then you can go that route and not have to spend as much money on a proper fuel system etc..in addition, you don't have to spend alot of money all at once.
Yeah. Thanks a lot man. I appreciate it. I can't believe the 'ol Civic has made it this far. We've had it since brand new and we've put a timing belt on, a set of brakes, and a few sets of tires. That's been it. Oh, and a window motor on the passenger side.
Beyond that, just routine maintenance like oil changes, tranny fluid changes, etc. have kept that car running strong!
How many miles on your Cobra?
EsqEddy?
LOL Car built by HPP Racing (who makes my twin kit).
I believe the reason the car maintained a blower was for class rules. Put turbo(s) on that thing and watch that record get crushed.
Can a twin screw be fast? You bet your ass! Can it be done cheaper than a turbo setup? You bet your ass! Heck, I bet if someone had the fabrication capabilities, they could fabricate their own turbo setup for less than the cost of a blower. But my question is do you have either?
I do agree with you on your statement about which is more efficient. Turbo is free power, when a SC is parastic. However, it is almost never the case that a turbo motor would last just as long if not longer, because it is too easy to just crank up the boost on a turbo set up and blow your engine up just like that. A lot of people get greedy when they lose races, then they just turn it up thinking it will give them the edge. I think the same boost from either set up should be equally reliable with today's technology or else new car manufacturers wouldn't use the PD SCs that can last just as well.
The arguement is not the PD is slow, but how some of the Turbo owners say it is slower than Turbo. Not always true. BLK_03 posted a video that isn't really a fair race. Why not try from digs, or a 3.4L Whipple? He has a TT which is almost the ultimate in Turbo set up verus an older PD SC. I think a PD can be as fast for somewhat cheaper seeing how Turbo kits are near twice the price of the biggest PD SC in the 3.4 Whipple. There are a couple of 3.4 Whipples that already ran 9's on stock block at 140+ MPH and that's the shake down runs. I read that one of them blew the stock engine though because of excessive boost. Without going Outlaw, Pro, etc. with their insane turbo set ups, a SC can be just as fast if not faster off the line or a curve. The poster wants to do 1/4 and road action, and not highway roll ons at high speeds unless I am not following it right. A 3.4 Whipple will net you enough power to be competitive in that kind of racing as they can do 700RWHP for sure and thats with all the TQ very early in the band and flat across to the crossing point.
However, you did make a very good point that I did not think of, about how the money could be recouped when all the old supercharger parts are sold which is indeed a very good point in itself. I was pulling for the 3.4 Whipple because the poster seemed somewhat concerned about the cost and what type of racing he wants to do. He can have his engine built and the Whipple for $10k if he can do his labor and still have some left over for the supporting modifications. Now, if he still have the original supercharger parts he can sell, then it might be a different story because it would of off-set the Turbo kit initial cost. If he can afford a few more thousand dollars, then yeah he should go with a Turbo for its unlimited potential. He might have more kinks with the Turbo kit to work out in the end since the car came from factory with a PD SC and not turbo.
I said I was not knocking on any of you guys with the Turbos, and I've said it several times. If cost is a concern, stay with a PD SC, and if it is not then go Turbo is my opinion. Not to mention how fun the PD SC will be from light to light if it can catch traction, and off the curves while road racing. The low end grunt is fun. A Whipple will make all of its Torque by like 2,000RPM when a Turbo will have to rev higher for the same torque. That's my opinion, and opinions are not right or wrong.
Last edited by a moderator:
The poster of this thread asked about cost, so apparently it is a part of the decision equation for him. If money is a concern then yes I am carrying the S/C bandwagon. The car came stock with a S/C so it is going to be cheaper to "upgrade" to a different S/C verus swapping it out for a new power adder. If I had only $10k to spend then yes I would stay with the S/C. This way, I can get a 3.4 Whipple, and a built motor at the same time with myself doing the labor. I would then have some money left over to do the supporting modifications. If he want to sell the original s/c set up to recoup some money back, then maybe he can do a single turbo set up for not too much more money and still have a built motor if he can do his labor himself.
If the budget is $10k:
3.4L Whipple $3.9k
Built motor $4k
= $7.9k, and $2.1k left for supporting mods, and any necessary parts and pieces. Fuel Injectors, BAP/pumps, idlers, HE, rear tires, etc.
Single Hellion $6.5k
Built motor $4k
= $500 over the budget and no supporting mods.
If he's lucky and can get $2,500 out of his exisiting supercharger set up, then he's going to be alright. It may be more potent for the long run to grow with if he doesn't end up happy with 700-800rwhp. If the sales doesn't fall, then more money out of his pockets to make the turbo set up right with some supporting mods. Last I saw, a low mileage Eaton is going for only $400, but then there is still the intercooler, pullies, heat exchanger, etc.
You have the power to hit 9's so I wouldn't be surprised if you do. You spent enough to warrant for a 9 second time slip. If a Eaton car can hit 9's, then you can too when you get everything worked out.
Last edited by a moderator:
Truth!
Just food for thought here... You keep talking about tracking a Cobra. A turbo'd track car and a Whipple 3.4 tracked car will not be in the same league. While the turbo car is making laps, the PD car will be on it's way to the pits, in limp mode. Although the Whipple blowers have lower IAT's than the KB cars, a turbo car has SIGNIFICANTLY lower IAT's. Lower IAT's = more power + less chance of detonation.
Yeah, EsqEddy's car. I know you know your stuff as someone in here mentioned you went through everything on your car. That is amazing to me because that is way too much money to fool around with. I bet if you are the happiest with your current set up that you wish you just of went straight to it in the first place. I can understand your point of view why you are telling the poster to just go straight there. He might end up unhappy with 700RWHP as you apparently did.
I wasn't aware of the class rules, but the point is a PD SC whether it is a twin screw or roots type can still be too much for many. 9's with an Eaton is way more impressive to me than high 10's with a TT that need roll on races to win all the time. Try digs, and be a good sport when you lose sometimes. We all lose sometimes with all forms of power adders. There are a few Eaton cars that can beat you in the quarter mile for cheaper.
There you said it, a twin screw can be fast for cheaper. The poster doesn't have your kind of an open checkbook unless he changes his mind and goes all out.
Good question, no, I don't. Isn't the internet a great thing? :lol: at me. I would still go with a 3.4L Whipple if money was of a concern. I elected to keep my Cobra a virgin one over the years with less than 5,000 miles currently as I have no need to go all out with it. I've had experiences with fast Turbo cars before, and they always broke. GMC Typhoon, and Talon TSI are good examples. Sure, both were sick, but they weren't as reliable as my Cobra is now. That is how I went with mine, however that might change if I end up keeping my Cobra longer. A 3.4L Whipple is tempting, and it would keep my '03 what it is which is a PD SC car as it came. Just my opinion and that has been bashed on already. Me getting -> :bash: <- by Turbo guys
Last edited by a moderator:
That's interesting.
Again, you've had the experience with the various set-ups, whereas I did not. I guess I shouldn't be arguing my opinion in this thread because I don't have a solid base to go off of. Just what I read on other people's experiences and their proven results at the drag strip.
I didn't think a turbo car IAT can be that much lower than a whipple car IAT. How much lower if you're talking significantly in capitals. I know the initial intake charge out of Turbo is very hot, perhaps hotter than the charge out of SC before intercooler, but apparently per you the turbo's intercooler does a better job of cooling down the intake charge temperatures than what intercooler is on a PD SC Cobra. It makes sense to me as the Turbo intercoolers are huge compared to the tiny PD SC intercooler.
I can do back to back pulls over and over with the twins spooled up to 22 psi and my IAT's BARELY get over 100 degrees. I've put the car into limp mode after 2 or 3 pulls with the blower.
Turbos create heat on the exhaust side but that doesnt go into the motor being why Turbos can achieve much lower IATs then PD blowers. With my 2.2 KB, iced for an hour after a 1/4 pass. My IATs were @ the point where it was pulling 5* of timing because they were so hot after a burnout before I could even make a pass at the track.
:cuss:
Users who are viewing this thread
