Here Is One For You Kids

[liquid00meth]

supercharger horror story


Jackson racing, also. So hows that for people who think SC = reliable?


notice how the name of the article isn't "I LOVE MY SUPERCHARGER."

superchargers came from muscle cars that run at low RPMS and have enough torque/hp to spare that driving another belt isn't too much of a difference.

Note this: hondas run at high RPMs, and hondas are a little weak in the hp/torque department.

Turbo was made for medium to high RPMs, and with no added drag on the motor.

So, Honda = Turbo.

Is it really that hard of a choice?

There was also an article in (Turbo?) that I read, where they ran a supercharged integra. The car ran miserable numbers. It was laughable.

But Kevin, Superchargers make HP at lower RPMs!
yea, now subtract the parastitc drag from your HP.

And while your, to quote some SC monkey, "gone before your turbo spools up", we'll see who is "gone" at 6,000 RPMS when your supercharger is pushing about as much air as my bedroom fan, and my hp curve is still too steep to walk up.




and by the way, if that hasn't convinced you,

superchargers are :ghey:

 

[posol]

that story is from 1997.

a lot of things have changed since then

 

[Tonyd0821]

Originally posted by pissedoffsol@Mar 5 2003, 01:18 AM
that story is from 1997.

a lot of things have changed since then

is what he is saying about superchargers true?

no-go on a honda?

 

[posol]

while im not a fan of them in any means, I'd put a jackson on my car before i went NA on a b-seires.

 

[Tonyd0821]

Originally posted by pissedoffsol@Mar 5 2003, 01:36 AM
while im not a fan of them in any means, I'd put a jackson on my car before i went NA on a b-seires.

supposing i put a jackson on a stock ex....with basic bolt ons, I KNOW YOU CANT PREDICT IT DUE TO VARYING FACTORS,
but, in your best guesstimate....what do u think the 1/4 mile time would be around?

ok lemme put it this way, all things being equal, u think id be as fast if i had a gsr in it?

and let me say it again, i totally understand you cant predict 1/4 mile times due to varying factors.....

but whats ur best guess?

 

[posol]

no.

i wouldn't waste 2500 bucks on a d-series.

you might hang with a b16 equpped car, but i doubt a gsr one.

and they are stock, and you are done.

swap it.

 

[Tonyd0821]

Originally posted by pissedoffsol@Mar 5 2003, 01:56 AM
no.

i wouldn't waste 2500 bucks on a d-series.

you might hang with a b16 equpped car, but i doubt a gsr one.

and they are stock, and you are done.

swap it.

yessir.

 

[redtao]

Originally posted by pissedoffsol@Mar 5 2003, 01:56 AM
no.

i wouldn't waste 2500 bucks on a d-series.

you might hang with a b16 equpped car, but i doubt a gsr one.

and they are stock, and you are done.

swap it.

Now hold on a sec. i don't know how you guys drive a b16 or what you guys do to a b16 but in my sol i never had problems with beating gsr's. and that from the time i just had a intake and exhaust, to my final na car before the turbo.
b16 raps faster than gsr by more hp per liter and the sol weighs ~2500lbs.
on any lite to lite the b16 sol is faster
after 100mph i'll give it to the gsr things being equal.
and if your not smart and chose your battles then just stop now cause the fattest wallet is the fastest no matter what car.

just for the record i smoked dseries turbos with na sol vtec.

 

[posol]

yeah- but the reason behnd all that is that the b16 tranny is closer geared than a gsr.

 

[redtao]

Point taken.

 

[cws13]

He asked about a GSR in a civic, not a GSR. The ones I've seen gutted with the B18C1 swap are fast ass little cars for NA. Civic with that swap will take a B16 Sol.

 

[xj0hnx]

I'm sick of seeing that ONE article linked as people reason for avoiding Jackson,or superchargers in general.OMFG a guy had a problem,well shit they must all suck.Aviod them because you want more controllable power,tunability and top end insanity,not because of an atricle from a guy would had a bad experiance.

 

[liquid00meth]

Originally posted by 92b16vx@Mar 5 2003, 09:15 PM
I'm sick of seeing that ONE article linked as people reason for avoiding Jackson,or superchargers in general.OMFG a guy had a problem,well shit they must all suck.Aviod them because you want more controllable power,tunability and top end insanity,not because of an atricle from a guy would had a bad experiance.

notice my rather lengthy section of supporting evidence after the link...........

 

[SolReaver]

Originally posted by liquid00meth@Mar 4 2003, 08:23 PM

superchargers came from muscle cars that run at low RPMS and have enough torque/hp to spare that driving another belt isn't too much of a difference.

Note this: hondas run at high RPMs, and hondas are a little weak in the hp/torque department.

Turbo was made for medium to high RPMs, and with no added drag on the motor.

So, Honda = Turbo.

Is it really that hard of a choice?

i am by no means supporting superchargers, but your explanation here isnt very logical

Superchargers typically help low end power due to the nature of them being driven off the crank, provides boost faster than exhaust gases will spool a decent sized turbo. Granted, there are some turbos that will outspool blowers but nobody wants those turbos anyways

Hondas produce good power at high rpm- thus the low end is lacking, why not improve your low end power with a roots- type blower? You would think that if anything could benefit greatly from a turbo is a big block engine found in american muscle cars. Huge displacement, plenty of stock low end power, ability to spool a massive turbo...

 

[vtecsir1]

my friend has a jackson on his gsr with upgraded pulley and boost. 2yrs still running strong

 

[GSRCRXsi]

hey vtecsir1, im planning on SC my GSR engine and im just wondering what modifications your friend has to his engine. i.e. pistons/rods, cams, cam gears, head work, fuel upgrades, im just wondering how much work i have ahead for me.

 

[liquid00meth]

Originally posted by SolReaver+Mar 5 2003, 09:45 PM-->

liquid00meth

@Mar 4 2003, 08:23 PM

superchargers came from muscle cars that run at low RPMS and have enough torque/hp to spare that driving another belt isn't too much of a difference.

Note this: hondas run at high RPMs, and hondas are a little weak in the hp/torque department.

Turbo was made for medium to high RPMs, and with no added drag on the motor.

So, Honda = Turbo.

Is it really that hard of a choice?

i am by no means supporting superchargers, but your explanation here isnt very logical

Superchargers typically help low end power due to the nature of them being driven off the crank, provides boost faster than exhaust gases will spool a decent sized turbo. Granted, there are some turbos that will outspool blowers but nobody wants those turbos anyways

Hondas produce good power at high rpm- thus the low end is lacking, why not improve your low end power with a roots- type blower? You would think that if anything could benefit greatly from a turbo is a big block engine found in american muscle cars. Huge displacement, plenty of stock low end power, ability to spool a massive turbo...

"big american muscle car motors" rev much lower than hondas.... since a turbo makes it's best efficiency at mid to high RPMS, it seems like a pretty wrong choice for a muscle car. You can of course get a turbo sized to spool to full potential at low RPMS, but if that was such a great option, why are the beefiest muscle cars SC, and the beefiest hondas turbo?

You also must understand that while a SC helps your low end, it also adds a ton of drag to the motor, and you will never be able to realize the full top end potential of the honda powerplant.

 

[liquid00meth]

and btw, I was just pointing out an article a read for anyone who was interested, and a few opinions of my regarding SCs. Just beacause *I* prefer turbo over SC at the moment, doesn't mean I'm saying SCs are completely useless and all cars that have them are shit on wheels.



.02

 

[Bri94lst]

thats the first horror story ive ever heard for JR. Ive heard way more for turbo people but what it all comes down to is incompetence. I didnt read the article in full detail but i didnt see anywhere in there of what size pulley he was running. Alot of people liek to put over sized pullies on the chargers and burn them out.

 

[BigJ]

LOL My mom's ex bf had a 70's vega station wagon with a 350 and a 671 blower on it. He had the engine tweaked to about 7 or 8k depending on what setting the blower was on. Only problem was that when he would go that high he couldn't find a belt to hold it and not snap. He ran 9's though streetable. Point is that if he went with a turbo he couldn't have gotten near that because a turbo on big motors has lag so that's why most muscle cars use blowers for good power.

Did anyone read the Excedy article posted earlier today? Sometimes stuff breaks. Nothign is perfect really.