S/C NSX That Much Faster Than Stock?

[DDozier]

Looking at these same cars and looking at the runs over time instead of engine speed and you see the real picture for how much faster each car is in a given run, keep in mind the cars are not exactly geared the same but they were pulled in the closet possible gear match for this comparison, and the terminal speed of each car is within 4mph. If you wanted to do an exact comparison all cars would have to start and stop the pull at the same RPM. This is hard to do on a Dynojet, so draw from it what you will.

Dave

 

[GhettoRacer]

Image a bit too small... so hard to read.

 

[DDozier]

Image a bit too small... so hard to read.

Added direct links to image in Gallery so you can view full size.

Dave

 

[jks32]

Re: SC vs Turbo

I can change this boost curve by adjusting the vain controller to move the target boost level hit at a earlier RPM. When the clutch is replaced I will be able to play with the controller and move the target boost down the RPM range. This will make them spool to peak boost quicker but my fear is it will spoil the feel of the car. After having the CTSC I like the feel of the twin screw at lower RPMs but love the turbo up top. I sort of have both now so I may keep it this way after I do some more testing.

I am running the FIC now and am waiting on AEM to release the new Infinity EMS so I can use it to run the DBW and the vain controller, then I will have a programmable boost peak and curve without piggy backing on the OEM ECU.

Dave

e.g. The hassle/fiddle factor

If you have the patience, knowlege and time (time can = money for some) turbo is provides the most potential. However, I would propose that doing so requires substantial knowledge about FI as well as turbo tuning or at least a very competent LOCAL tuner to get to this point reliably. For most, the end point, albeit somewhat more subdued, is more EASILY achieved with the SC. I think SOS SC is a good middle point between the Comptech SC and a hot turbo set-up. That said, this is a very personal and subjective decision. There is no right FI only what works best for you.

 

[DDozier]

Re: SC vs Turbo

e.g. The hassle/fiddle factor

If you have the patience, knowlege and time (time can = money for some) turbo is provides the most potential. However, I would propose that doing so requires substantial knowledge about FI as well as turbo tuning or at least a very competent LOCAL tuner to get to this point reliably. For most, the end point, albeit somewhat more subdued, is more EASILY achieved with the SC. I think SOS SC is a good middle point between the Comptech SC and a hot turbo set-up. That said, this is a very personal and subjective decision. There is no right FI only what works best for you.

I agree to some degree about the SC being a little easier, mainly for the reason that you have less choices/options to change with the CT/SOS style systems. For some that is a good thing but for others that want choices a turbo offers a wide open range of choices, you can start out at 350hp and move up to 400hp by simply changing a spring in a waste gate or adjust a setting in a boost controller. The path to raise boost and power is much cheaper with a turbo than a SC. You can add a pound or two of boost with a pulley and belt change then you most likley have to replace the blower to go to the next level.

There are so many turbo kit options and installers now, it really is amazing compared to when I got my first NSX the only real off the shelf option was a CTSC, now if you are thinking about FI you have so many good choices that the fiddle factor is almost gone. Just pick the system, installer and tuner and write the check. Then your done.

In the case of my car I wanted something that was not out there already, I had the means and the shop to do the work, and tune it in the end so the path I chose was more time than money. I have had the system on my car for almost 18 months, after the first tune I could have left things alone but I decided to play with the variable-vain turbos to see what effect the adjustments would have. I am still playing/fiddling with them but for me that is part of the fun of designing, building, and finally testing my own turbo system.

Like you I think the choice is a personal one but at least we have the choice. Not everyone will take the path of building their own system, or tuning their own car, but you do not have to either, there are plenty of good proven choices out there.

Dave

 

[onestepx]

Basch Supercharger best bang for your buck any-day with Aem standalone unlimited amount of boost pulleys available from 7-20lbs of boost
I am currently making 541 RWHP on my BBSC kit on 19lbs of boost on my previous day at the track on 15lbs of boost at 508 RWHP the car ran 11.50s in the 1/4 mile still spinning thru 1st gear here is a little video from my current dyno run making 541 RWHP This kit might be up for sale soon as I am looking to go Turbo for 800 HP mark PM me if interested

Click here for Video: http://youtu.be/EK6WjNXr9uc

 

[BATMANs]

Does anyone have any information on comparing similar "class" of FI solutions that would be FI solutions that push similar amounts of air?

For example, comparing a puny displacement CTSC to larger displacement BBSC or turbo is like showing up to the horse race with a donkey or a mule.

Also, are we talking about the Whipple or KB blower for the CTSC?

My SOS S/C with the Driving Ambition IC was making 425rwhp~ at 9.76psi on a Dynapak. So if my NSX were dyno'd on the Dynojet depicted in your graph then it should make similar power.

<object style="height: 390px; width: 640px"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/UZXbk3o-xHg?version=3&feature=player_detailpage"><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"><param name="allowScriptAccess" value="always"><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/UZXbk3o-xHg?version=3&feature=player_detailpage" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowfullscreen="true" allowScriptAccess="always" width="640" height="360"></object>

I'm running a 2.1 KB. Shad at Driving Ambition thinks the sweet spot displacement positive displacement blower would be more like a 2.3 liter (which the current ZR-1 runs with the Roots TVS2300).

 

[DDozier]

Also, are we talking about the Whipple or KB blower for the CTSC?

This example is a Whipple CTSC, old style with a 9lb pulley making 8.4lbs peak boost no intercooler. The BBSC is a NOVI2000 no intercooler making mid 8lbs of boost. The TTurbo is running twin 66-series 200/482 variable-vain turbos with WTA intercooler.

I know the comparison is loaded towards the turbo, but it is the data I have and the comparison between the different types of forced induction and the effect they have on the HP and TQ curves is still valid, you just have to look at the curves and not look at peak numbers.

My 04 Turbo makes 424whp on Dynapacks so the DynoJet reads slightly higher at 434whp using STD correction factors, using the SAE correction factor they are within 5whp and very close to each other, at least the two dynos I have access two.

Dave

 

[BATMANs]

This example is a Whipple CTSC, old style with a 9lb pulley making 8.4lbs peak boost no intercooler. The BBSC is a NOVI2000 no intercooler making mid 8lbs of boost. The TTurbo is running twin 66-series 200/482 variable-vain turbos with WTA intercooler.

I know the comparison is loaded towards the turbo, but it is the data I have and the comparison between the different types of forced induction and the effect they have on the HP and TQ curves is still valid, you just have to look at the curves and not look at peak numbers.

Dave

LOL.

It's totally loaded against the CTSC in terms of size and being endowed with an intercooler.

 

[DDozier]

My SOS S/C with the Driving Ambition IC was making 425rwhp~ at 9.76psi on a Dynapak. So if my NSX were dyno'd on the Dynojet depicted in your graph then it should make similar power.

Our cars look to be making very similar TQ and HP numbers, on dynapacks I made 424whp/300lbft but I am doing it at 7.97psi of boost, that gives us an idea of how much additional boost your car needs to overcome the parisitic effect of the SC. I do like the looks of your torque curve but the 2300 may be able to keep the CFM's up at the end a little better.

Dave

 

[BATMANs]

Our cars look to be making very similar TQ and HP numbers, on dynapacks I made 424whp/300lbft but I am doing it at 7.97psi of boost, that gives us an idea of how much additional boost your car needs to overcome the parisitic effect of the SC. I do like the looks of your torque curve but the 2300 may be able to keep the CFM's up at the end a little better.

Dave

BTW, is your engine built or stock?

I can't wait to crank more boost outta my blower with my built engine (which I'll create a separate thread in the near future).

 

[DDozier]

LOL.

It's totally loaded against the CTSC in terms of size and being endowed with an intercooler.

I agree and was not trying to hide that fact but the reality is all these systems are in the 8-8.5lbs of boost and that is what I was trying to show is how each systems acts at similar boost levels.

Dave

 

[DDozier]

BTW, is your engine built or stock?

I can't wait to crank more boost outta my blower with my built engine (which I'll create a separate thread in the near future).

Stock.

 

[Blacknot]

Re: SC vs Turbo

In regards to the original question....

There is no "right" answer to this question. There have been many, many threads on this subject; unfortunately, you have to filter A LOT for a few valuable and informative tidbits.

I agree with all quoted above except his last statement. I recently faced this choice, and I chose a SOS SC.

The choice IS a compromise:

PERSONAL FACTORS---Hassle, time and money
My car had not been driven for almost 8 years! I was an early adopter of a BBSC. I recognized the significant limitations of the fuel management system and did not drive it until I corrected the issues with an AEM. Unfortunately many other life issues got in the way and my "project" dragged on for years. The final rub was someone broke into my garage, stole my tools, and unbolted the blower from my car. I choose to get rid of the BBSC and start-over...since BBSC, the options have dramatically improved but the question remains: turbo vs SC.

After 8 years I am over it. I want a car that have some Woo Hoo BUT will be as reliable and hassle free as the day it came off the lot. I am over the constant hassle that some aftermarket changes create.
The CT and SOS SC are the only option for this. Bolt on, tune and DONE
By all accounts, the vehicle drives like a daily and is rock solid reliable.
This is not the case with any turbo kit. My impression is turbo will require constant fiddling and has a much higher hassle factor. There is a shop in Orlando well known to FL NSX owners, First Coast Automotive. The owner, Nabil, reported that he is constantly dealing with turbos problems, rarely if ever a SC.

If you have the time, interest and the hassle factor is not an issue then turbo is still an option.

THE NUMBERS GAME
Do you want to play horsepower wars and have bragging rights? Turbo will have much greater power potential. The CT SC gives only a modest boost of HP (not Woo Hoo) but it is the least hassle (bolt on and go.) SOS SC with aftercool will get you 400-420 rwhp with AEM and tuning. The SC is a Keene Bell. This system probably has a hp ceiling of 500 but SC efficiency is not optimal at this level.

Now, you can never have too much power. You will get used to that 420 HP quickly and you probably might want more (worse than crack.) The big hp numbers (>500) are with the turbo, but there is always a price..major more hassle, time and money. You are now into major lower end engine revision ($8-10K) plus you really do need to beef up the rest of the car (transmission, cooling system, oil, intercooler, clutch, etc.)

It again comes down to your personal situation. I have owned my car since 1995. My desires at 53 are different then they were at 36 years old. I do not care about bragging rights, I am not going to become a street racer, drag racer or part-time semi-pro track racer. I just want to drive my car and have some fun without having to spend my weekends constantly messing with it.

I also do not like the driving characteristics of the typical turbo. Lag is an issue with turbo. My daily driver (Audi A4 with reprogramed ECU) is a turbo. I have to drop down two gears to spin up the turbo to get into power. Gearing is also a factor, I would presume that this situation would be worse with the earlier 5-speed gearbox. While many claim their set-ups have minimal lag, I would highly recommend driving one before taking the leap. What happens when you floor the accelerator at 1500 rpm in 4th gear? The plus side is the big WOO HOO when the turbo does go to boost.

Conversely, the SC is more like a big V8. Very linear power band, very responsive and a controlled throttle response. I chose the SOS SC with laminova aftercooler and AEM. I am finishing the install so I cannot yet relate perception with experience.

I totally agree. My last fast car was a 700 whp Civic that I sold 5 years ago. I had gone through 5 different turbo set ups over the years and sunk so much time and money into the car because the car never was fast enough. It first ran 11.70's and by the time I sold it I was almost into the 9's. With my Nsx I wanted a supercharger because it was so much less to maintaine and no headaches. For me 400whp is plenty these days

 

[GhettoRacer]

Don't forget, handling is where NSX really shines. A car does not pull 1G in straight line acceleration for long, but it can corner constantly at 1G if you can handle it...

I've been daily driving the NSX for the last 2 weeks and I'm just so impressed with the handling. I can't wait to take it out on the next track day and smoke a bunch of people... it's been more than 7 years or so since I last took this NSX to the track. I should have some really cool in car footage to share in a month or two.

CTSC's value lies in simplicity (almost no pluming) and reliability. It is been installed in our car for over 11 years and over 90,000 miles. Sure it blew the stock ring lands at ~120,000 miles mark but in reality, it's been super reliable. One time about 10 years we had a broken belt from the track but with basic hand tools I was able to replace it in about 30 minutes at the track.

 

[BATMANs]

If you guys want power and simplicity nothing is better than a SOS SC with the DA IC. It makes about the same power like a turbo and I just passed the visual and sniffer on the strict California smog station.

 

[NetViper]

If you guys want power and simplicity nothing is better than a SOS SC with the DA IC. It makes about the same power like a turbo and I just passed the visual and sniffer on the strict California smog station.

Well, would you have needed a new engine build if you had gone with a CTSC.

There is something to be said with how simple the comptech set up is.

 

[BATMANs]

Well, would you have needed a new engine build if you had gone with a CTSC.

There is something to be said with how simple the comptech set up is.

My engine demise was with upgrading to the high boost pulley on the California 91 octane tree-hugger gas.

If I kept the boost under .5 bar then I would have been fine to this very day. But it would have felt a bit anemic to what I'm used to (550rwhp GTO & 430rwhp FD).

 

[NetViper]

My engine demise was with upgrading to the high boost pulley on the California 91 octane tree-hugger gas.

If I kept the boost under .5 bar then I would have been fine to this very day. But it would have felt a bit anemic to what I'm used to (550rwhp GTO & 430rwhp FD).

OK. Gotcha. I have always thought the SOS SC pushes a lot of boost on a stock motor, but I guess with the advances in tech with AEM etc, it is now a safe level for stock motors.

 

[BATMANs]

OK. Gotcha. I have always thought the SOS SC pushes a lot of boost on a stock motor, but I guess with the advances in tech with AEM etc, it is now a safe level for stock motors.

Part of my problem could be that I dun have the AEM EMS, but the FIC instead. The concern is whether or not the FIC is suited for high boost applications.

Also, there was a time when my SOS IC O-rings leaked and didn't know (no gauges at the moment) and was hammering it for many thousand of miles.

Tuning is another question.

bad gas.

Or the stock pistons can't handle too much dynamic pressures...

 

[BATMANs]

btw, there is one guy that i know that has the older CTSC making 390rwhp on the high boost kit sans intercooler.

Last i heard he KABOOMed on CA gas.....

 

[socalx]

With ca gas I put in some 100 octane fuel with each fill up with my low boost comptech na2.

 

[Track Addict]

Don't forget, handling is where NSX really shines. A car does not pull 1G in straight line acceleration for long, but it can corner constantly at 1G if you can handle it...

I've been daily driving the NSX for the last 2 weeks and I'm just so impressed with the handling. I can't wait to take it out on the next track day and smoke a bunch of people... it's been more than 7 years or so since I last took this NSX to the track. I should have some really cool in car footage to share in a month or two.

CTSC's value lies in simplicity (almost no pluming) and reliability. It is been installed in our car for over 11 years and over 90,000 miles. Sure it blew the stock ring lands at ~120,000 miles mark but in reality, it's been super reliable. One time about 10 years we had a broken belt from the track but with basic hand tools I was able to replace it in about 30 minutes at the track.

Well said, I always thought that the Comptech (CT-Engineering) unit was a great way to up power reliably. Sure there are others out there like Angus with his turbo and then SOS makes their variant of the supercharger. Comptech really designed their product to be just a solid as Honda built the NSX to be.

I have been toying with the idea of going FI and I honestly think that if I go FI the Comptech unit will be the way I go...at least as long as I live in CA.

 

[GhettoRacer]

Well said, I always thought that the Comptech (CT-Engineering) unit was a great way to up power reliably. Sure there are others out there like Angus with his turbo and then SOS makes their variant of the supercharger. Comptech really designed their product to be just a solid as Honda built the NSX to be.

I have been toying with the idea of going FI and I honestly think that if I go FI the Comptech unit will be the way I go...at least as long as I live in CA.

Has anyone with NSX tried twin charging? SC + Turbo? There's a Canadian Civic with SOHC VTEC D16Z6 that has the Jackson Racing SC (Eaton which aren't as efficient as Lysholm) + Garrett GT28 and it makes something like 350 whp with super wide power band. CTSC + Twin GT28 would be 500+ whp with insane response I think...

 

[Track Addict]

Has anyone with NSX tried twin charging? SC + Turbo? There's a Canadian Civic with SOHC VTEC D16Z6 that has the Jackson Racing SC (Eaton which aren't as efficient as Lysholm) + Garrett GT28 and it makes something like 350 whp with super wide power band. CTSC + Twin GT28 would be 500+ whp with insane response I think...

AFAIK no one has Twin charged the NSX. With the amount of plumbing, weight and general higher costs that twin charging presents more headaches than is solves (typically) A well designed turbo setup will cost less and be 85-95% as fast and more efficient.

BTW to all, I didn't mean to slander anyone else's product, I think they're all awesome in their own right (SOS and Angus' turbo kit) and do an incredible job at making our beloved NSXs go faster through innovation (something we all should thank them for :redface I like the CT product FOR my needs. that was the point I was trying to make there and that was it.