SC400TT: I agree. My statement was directed at jibbys comment about nitrous being more responsive than a NA car. I personally love boost and try to keep a medium between power and lag since my car is a daily driver. I opt for something fast spooling but at the same time will make decent hp on pump gas.

Jibby: If you take 2 cars that both make 500hp, a 500hp NA and a 350hp NA running a 150shot. The 500hp NA motor will be more responsive. Power will be very predictable and delivery will be very smooth. There will be no delay in power delivery. With nitrous, it still takes that split second for the shot to enter the motor which takes if from a 350hp motor to a 500hp motor. The hp is also relative to rpm since both motor in NA trim probably won't make its max hp until it’s near redline. Therefore, the nitrous motor has no advantage over the pure NA motor. The 500hp NA motor will have its power on demand with no need to activate anything at anytime as oppose to the nitrous motor, you get an extra 150hp surge. How is that more responsive?

I also understand that there are progressive nitrous kits and all but at the same time there are anti lag systems for turbocharger that virtually eliminate any lag. There are even supercharged and turbocharged cars in the past that has the best of both worlds having low end boost without lag and top end turbo power. Does that make a boosted setup more responsive than a pure naturally aspirated motor? No because no matter how much lag you reduce, there is always going to be a fraction of a second if not more where boost or nitrous is engaged which a NA motor will never run into.

 

but who around here has the money/time to make an 500hp NA SC?

 

5spdsc300 - Ok - N/A power is very responsive, controlled and smoothe excelleration...I totally Agree...Let me ask you this? Have you ever seen a dyno chart with nitrous being run? The spike HP curve is rediculous and agressive when the Nitrous is activativated...., more agressive then a N/A motor spike HP curve that is shown on a dyno sheet.....Simply said Nitrous being fused with standard gasoline and detonated in the combustion chamber is going to burn faster then just gasoline by itself...

I don't think the 500whp N/A motor is going to reach peak engine and rpm performance befroe a nitrous rung 500whp motor...I think straight engine power the nitrous run car will reach peak rpm performace before the naturally aspired engine would....Either way both would rip....Root charger too...The difference is controlled excelleration vs. not controlled acceleration.....

 

94lex83457: Im never mentioned anything about building a 500hp NA SC. It was just used as an example since we were on the topic of response.

Jibby: I don't disagree with you that nitrous provides an instant hp spike greater than a NA motor would create. I also agree that both motors creating 500hp would rip whether it was NA or on nitrous. The only thing i disagree on with you was your statement about nitrous being more responsive which you have addressed .

 

I feel like adding a couple cents here...

all automatic rwd drag cars, even street drag cars, when using nitrous, usually have the system armed, as jiiby described, so that at WOT, you will receive an instantaneous power increase...

here's just one example..

friend with old T/A - car makes 375 at the rear tires off the bottle, through an auto tranny with a relatively low stall... car makes just over 500 on the bottle...

at the strip, he sits at the line, left foot on the brake, right foot entirely off the accelerator... lights change to green (or right before), he lifts his left foot, mashes the accelerator, the torque converter flashes, he pulls a 1.3x 60' and is in the 10's every time... nitrous is activated the entire time - even between shifts... of course, the trans is in great shape and can stand the power, but that's how nitrous is supposed to be used in a drag race / auto tranny car...

one other note about turbos versus superchargers... turbos will always make more horsepower boost for boost... there is just less power wasted from the belt driven supercharger, so, more power makes it to the rear tires...

a quote from a notable mustang turbo builder:
"I hope you don't take this post as biased because I own a company that builds twin turbos for late model cars (including mustangs), but I did my research, I picked turbos for a reason. If I would have thought that superchargers would have been the best option I would have done something with them.

Turbos will always make more power, period as they have no parasitic loss of having to turn a pulley with the crank to generate hp. I have heard estimates of taking 45-75hp to turn a blower pulley.

Turbos make power sooner than a centrifugal blower as these types of blowers are rpm based and don't make max boost until redline, where turbos make full boost (if properly configured) at around 3000rpms...where do you do most of your driving? 3000rpms or 7000rpms?

The roots type blowers (Eaton, KB, etc.) make great power down low, nice flat torque curves, but they seem to be limited in how much hp they can make. The Eaton's, like on the '03 Cobras, seem to top out at the 500-600rwhp level and tend to generate a lot of heat there. The KB's generate less heat and produce more hp, but I believe their limit is around the 700rwhp.

Turbos require zero maintenance. As long as you keep their air clean (quality air filters) and use good oil in your engine with regular oil changes, they will outlive your car. Over the road semi's run them for millions of miles between rebuilds. They don't have to be rebuilt every couple of years like centrifugal superchargers. I haven't heard any maintenance needs for the roots type blowers.

Turbos don't require pulley changes to raise/lower boost. Just push a few buttons on your electronic boost controller, turn a **** if you have a manual boost controller instead, or swap out a spring in your wastegates if you have no boost controller."

 

sorry, wishful thinking

 

turbo's will always make more horsepower, but with a blower you have all that available torque down low even as you said where you do most of your driving. personally 600HP is more than enough (for me-but i am at a lowly 225HP) and when road racing isn't a supercharger more effective even with the power loss?

P.S. i'd like to see a car that was on full boost by 3000 rpm

 

Many turbo cars are designed this way.

The VW 1.8T reaches full torque before 2,000 rpm.

It's all in the turbo you choose.

 

Definitely...

take the 3000GT VR-4 as another example....

300 lbft of torque at 2500 rpm, max hp (320) at 5500 rpm...

 

turbos still make the horsepower easier... one of the big mustang tuner magazines did a direct comparison on an 03 cobra... one with a upgraded supercharger and lots of boost, and one with a simple twin turbo kit...

the twin turbo kit made 150 more wheel horsepower on much less boost, with 90% of the torque available down low...

one thing everyone needs to stop and think about is that torque down low is not necessarily a good thing... all it ever ends up being is wheel spin... whereas a turbo car with properly sized turbo(s) will still make a lot of torque down low, but make much more power up high, when it's easier to get traction...

either way, it comes down to driving...

when I had a 20g on my talon, I'd come off the line at almost full boost just by slipping the clutch a little... 1.5x 60's on street tires, and I was in the 11's spinning tires all over the place (it was AWD)...

the only places turbo lag is really noticeable is when you punch it from a roll, or you don't launch, and you just aren't in the powerband... but, the same can be said for any v-tec or vvt-i or mivec car - they simply make more power up high...

 

NOS is so cheap and easy. Especially for someone that does not drag a lot but only once in a while.
I'd use it if I had a four hundo.

 

Well said everyone....Chargers vs. Turbo's...With turbo's the only down side I see with them is the dynamic power that you wont get from idlle or launch as you would with a root charger or nos... That's the bottom line....

Turbo's other wise win in every other way...MPG I am not so sure about though.....

 

Another uneducated statement. The beauty of Turbos are the variety of options that you can have. Smaller turbos make boost at lower RPM with limitations on total volume. My stock twins make 18lbs of boost at 1800 RPM. I can smoke my very sticky rubber through 1st gear from a stand still. NO stall convertor or neutral drop. Just gas and go!

Plus I get 10 MPG more than my NA motor.

 

94lex83457: It would be nice if a 500hp NA Lexus V8 was easily attainable for a decent price. Thats the main thing the makes me stray from the v8 is the lack of support. I hit full boost by 3000rpm on my aftermarket single turbo setup. Its a fairly small turbo compared to what supra guys usally run but its my street car so i wanted a balance between big top end power and spool.

 

for a decent price is the only issue...

put some big nasty cams, some tough, lightweight retainers with heavy spring rate valve springs, port the head, make sure the bottom end is balanced perfect with 12.5:1 cr, long tube headers, and a tunable ECU, and I have no doubt you'd be able to get 500 hp N/A, potentially more, out of a 1uzfe motor...

parts wise you would be looking at:

headers (long tubes, custom): $1000
complete exhaust: $500
cams: $1400
ported head / built heads: $1800
balanced bottom end/pistons/assembly: $1500
AEM EMS universal: $1800

plus labor if needed and tuning

then you have to decide what to do with the auto tranny... dump it in favor of a 6 speed, or get it built with some sort of custom controller, either way, around $2500

but it'd definitely be badass...