Which Supercharger?

batman here is A/F at 15psi

That's pretty good A/F ratios.

With the stock 10.2 Compression ratio and those A/F ratios wouldn't 14.7psi (1 bar) of boost be safe?

I'm just comparing notes from the LSx community where there are examples of people running similar boost, AFR and compression ratios.
 
Having been a SC driver on 2 different NSX's, 1.7 CT 385 rwhp and a custom Whipple 2.3, 435 rwhp for 3 years, and now recently switching to a G35 FXMD turbo system, I personally would never go back to an SC'd car, but that's just my opinion.

Nothing replaces HP in an competitive environment once you have the skill to drive it. There were many times on track where my skill was better in the turns than those I was competing with but just couldn't get by them for the lack of power to get around them, or if I did get by them it was only to be passed down the straight-aways and have to start the process all over again. I found this to be very frustrating to work so hard in the corners just to give it all up down the straights.

Now that I have the turbo, I've asked myself why I waited so long to make the change to turbo.

They both have the advantages and dis-advantages.

The SC is easier to drive in a lot of ways, I always loved the smooth power curve of the SC and to be honest didn't think I would ever change to a turbo system...

But now that I've been driving the turbo, I am getting used to this power curve as well and know what to expect and how to work with it.

On the street, OK, the SC is probably better for those that drive their cars on a simi regular basis, easier to maintain, carb legal and produce good power and torq. Very easy to throttle steer and very controllable. But it lacks in being fast getting to fast and anybody that says it doesn't hasn't probably driven a well designed turbo system.

But for those that track their cars quite often, as I was doing with my both of my SC setups and will be doing with the new turbo, I find that having the additional power of the turbo is welcomed. Maybe on the street lag is an issue, but on the track, the lag really isn't an issue since you are in boost range most of the time anyway. If your not, the torq seems to put in boost range pretty quick anyway.

One of the reason I didn't go turbo for the 3 years of driving SC's was because I hate lag. But now having driven the turbo I have, I have learned to minimize lag and have found that the throttle response is superior to SC'd cars. I have yet to see any SC that can deliver the free power that a turbo can easily produce. Not to mention I feel like my motor was totally freed up by not having to spin a twin screw situation with a belt.

I believe both are a great choices depending on what you are looking to get out of your car, how you intend to use your car and how competitive you want to be if you plan on tracking/racing it.

I have 560 rwhp and 400 ft lbs of torq on a conservative tune. I don't see that ever happening with a SC.
 
Last edited:
Yes, I know I am, it's kinda hard to really make an equal comparison between the two in reality..

In terms of power only, yes, I probably would prefer the SC if I could get the sme numbers I get with the turbo because of the way the power comes on with the SC..But still the SC seems to make the motor work harder and you lose more HP mechanically by having to turn the screws is my thoughts.


Coz, good points, but you are comparing SC 2 different solutions with a significant delta in terms of power. So your giving up power to make power.

If both produced the same power, then you would prefer the SC solution?
 
Last edited:
The twin screw is a much more thermally efficient supercharger and is capable of much more power in the same given package size because of the compression action of a twin screw (Roots just moves air - a twin screw moves and compresses).

regards,
-- Chris
 
I think that's the point being made. For most of us, driving on the street, we're not at wide open throttle al the time up shifting from 8000 RPM - 6000 RPM. The positive displacement supercharger largely mimics a small displacement V8 giving the NSX a more rounded feel. Although it may be closer, even with a smaller single turbocharger, the response will never be as directly rated to throttle input. A smaller turbocharger may be able to get much closer to the response that the positive displacement supercharger produces, but then will choke the system on the top end. Even the twin Bell setup using two GT25s taps out at around 380 whp and still has a moment of lag.

This is the same way I've been looking at the SC. My car is my daily driver in the summer months, I stressed driveability up most and the emissions/smog testing as well. I originally was leaning towards the CT but now SOS came out with a larger positive displacement version. I guess it comes down to what you'd be using your car for? Daily driving or straight track? How streetable is a 500Hp + Turbo setup going to be?
 
....How streetable is a 500Hp + Turbo setup going to be?

I think that is streetable.

It depends on the driver skills and how much u respect power at the end of the day.

What's nice about alot of power is that you won't wear and tear ur clutch, pedal, etc. as much since there isn't always a need to down or up shift.
 
In terms of power only, yes, I probably would prefer the SC because of the way the power comes on

LOL... I got a chuckle after I read that long reply about how much more you like the turbo then after asked "if power was equal" you say "yeah I like the SC". It was kind of funny.

I totally understand where you are coming from and thanks for the reply. I guess there is no substitute for power and the turbo delivers it.

That's why Kip dropped his 575 HP comptech 3.5 liter SC'd motor for a turbo.

I just think if I went turbo, I'd build the motor and go for the gold. Below that, I'd just stick to the SC.
 
Do the screw blowers draw more power to make it run than a Roots blower?

The Magnacharger in the GTO draws 1/3HP at 65MPH.

Are you serious with that comment?

1/3 Hp is when you are cruising off boost. With all your car knowledge you think it makes sense that a twin screw producing 15 psi is drawing 1/3 of a HP? LOL... we'd have found the answer to all the world's energy problems.

I don't know what the exact numbers are but at full boost the drag on a twin screw may be costing 50+ HP EASY.
 
My 94 had a stock motor, 1.7 CT, 8 lbs of boost, 385 rwhp on a Dyno Dynamics, drove it for 42000 miles in 2 years and it never hiccupped once with daily driving and at least 10 track events in that 2 years on the original tune.

The motor still runs like a clock.

That says something about SC's.

This is the same way I've been looking at the SC. My car is my daily driver in the summer months, I stressed driveability up most and the emissions/smog testing as well. I originally was leaning towards the CT but now SOS came out with a larger positive displacement version. I guess it comes down to what you'd be using your car for? Daily driving or straight track? How streetable is a 500Hp + Turbo setup going to be?
 
That's really a good way to think...

If your going to go turbo, you're looking for HP beyond what a SC can ever give you.... so....if you want bigger HP, start with building a motor capable of handling more power first.

Then decide. That's what I did.

There is no right or wrong in any of this really, it's personal preference and what YOU want out of your car.


LOL... I got a chuckle after I read that long reply about how much more you like the turbo then after asked "if power was equal" you say "yeah I like the SC". It was kind of funny.

I totally understand where you are coming from and thanks for the reply. I guess there is no substitute for power and the turbo delivers it.

That's why Kip dropped his 575 HP comptech 3.5 liter SC'd motor for a turbo.

I just think if I went turbo, I'd build the motor and go for the gold. Below that, I'd just stick to the SC.
 
Last edited:
I have been told about 12 to 13%. of your final rwhp.
At 435 rwhp on my 2.3 Whipple, 52hp to 56hp loss.

I don't know what the exact numbers are but at full boost the drag on a twin screw may be costing 50+ HP EASY.
 
Last edited:
I have 560 and do both as much as possible.

I drive my NSX almost everyday. 80 miles today...It's very streetable, just keep your foot out of it.

I find my car easy to drive on the street, even with a Exedy Twin CF clutch.

I get 19 mpg on the highway and maybe 8-9 on the track.


Daily driving or straight track? How streetable is a 500Hp + Turbo setup going to be?
 
Last edited:
I think that is streetable.

It depends on the driver skills and how much u respect power at the end of the day.

What's nice about alot of power is that you won't wear and tear ur clutch, pedal, etc. as much since there isn't always a need to down or up shift.

I also have a GSX-R600 so no doubt I agree its all about the respect at the end of the day for sure!

I guess you'd be in like 3rd gear all the time with that kind of power? lol
 
My 94 had a stock motor, 1.7 CT, 8 lbs of boost, 385 rwhp on a Dyno Dynamics, drove it for 42000 miles in 2 years and it never hiccupped once with daily driving and at least 10 track events in that 2 years on the original tune.

The motor still runs like a clock.

That says something about SC's.

That does say a lot on a solid proven SC tested design & dyno tuned. I'm trusting the SOS will be the same I guess I will know in soon time :biggrin:
 
Are you serious with that comment?

1/3 Hp is when you are cruising off boost. With all your car knowledge you think it makes sense that a twin screw producing 15 psi is drawing 1/3 of a HP? LOL... we'd have found the answer to all the world's energy problems.

I don't know what the exact numbers are but at full boost the drag on a twin screw may be costing 50+ HP EASY.

I don't have much knowledge base on the twin screw ones since the one that is on my GTO is a Roots 3-lobe type (the more efficient 4-lobe type that made less heat like the twin screw blowers wasn't out at the time).

Here's a quote from Maggie's site (and I was off by 5mph): "• "Internal bypass valve" virtually eliminates parasitic loss...and delivers a proven 30 to 66% increase in real world "under the curve" power. Best of all, it costs less than 1/3 of a horse at 60 mph. Now that's real efficiency."

http://www.magnacharger.com/sc-gto.htm

Thanks to that, I'm getting 30~MPGs after a good tune at cruising freeway speeds at 65MPH. Of course when I boost the car then the story is more like 10 MPGs. My combined city and freeway driving with me flogging the pedal at every stop light (since the power and sound is like a dam drug) is just over 20 MPGs. Too bad the NSX is a transverse mount engine, otherwise there would be alot of LSx conversions (massive power when needed while sipping gas when cruising).

On Kenne Bell's site here are their efficiency claims:

"30% less parasitic loss and 30% lower air charge temp at same HP."
"More power, cooler charge temp, less power consumption/parasitic loss than stock Eaton."

I'm curious if the Kenne Bell Twin Screw has an internal bypass valve.

The rotary screw compressor has low leakage levels and low parasitic losses vs. roots-type. The supercharger is typically driven directly from the engine's crankshaft via a belt or gear drive. Unlike the Roots type supercharger, the twin-screw exhibits internal compression which is the ability of the device to compress air "within" the housing as it is moved through the device instead of relying upon resistance to flow downstream of the discharge to establish an increase of pressure.

Twin Screw Positive Points:
1) Great Power at Low RPMs (Great for Towing)
3) Factory Fit & Appearance
4) Great Reliability

Twin Screw Negative Points:
1) The Power Doesn't Keep Climbing in the High RPMs (Power curve is very flat)
2) Challenging To Achieve High Boost Levels or CFMs

Of the three basic supercharger types, the Roots has historically been considered the least fuel efficient. However, recent engineering developments by companies like Magnacharger have resulted in an improved Roots-type supercharger, known as the TVS, which is more efficient than their previous models. Most modern Roots-type superchargers incorporate three-lobe or four-lobe rotors. The latest design, introduced for the Ford Mustang GT500 Super Snake, has four lobes per rotor, enhancing its efficiency through a reduction of pulsations.

The Roots-type supercharger is simple and widely used. It can also be more effective than alternative superchargers at developing positive intake manifold pressure (i.e., above atmospheric pressure) at low engine speeds, making it a popular choice for passenger automobile applications. Peak torque can be achieved by about 2000 rpm.

Roots Positive Points:
1) Boost throughout the entire RPM range, right off of idle
2) Highest Potential for Gain (A must-have for all-out drag racing)
3) Excellent Reliability
4) Great Appearance & Stature (Most common supercharger type for show vehicles)

Roots Negative Points:
1) Sometimes Violent Throttle Response
2) Lower boost ratings at higher RPMs
3) Higher Than Normal Discharge Temperatures
 
Last edited:
I also have a GSX-R600 so no doubt I agree its all about the respect at the end of the day for sure!

I guess you'd be in like 3rd gear all the time with that kind of power? lol

My 1sts and 2nd gear is totally useless with 4 passengers, full luggage and full tank of gas on 275/35/18 in the back.

3rd gear with just me on a cold night is useless.

That is with the old engine.

The new engine is getting under cut valves ceramic coated internals for improved thermo efficiencies and a pulley that will bump my boost from 5.5 to 8psi~. All of this should add another 100HP and TQ. I think at that point my 3rd gear will be useless with 4 passengers, full luggage and full tank of gas on 275/35/18 in the back.

I like that since races end fast or it never starts when people see me shift throw 3 gears while the car is making the rear wheels a blur. The sounds of the blower and full exhaust scares people too.
 
So what do you actually calculate the power loss to be on a SC Batman ?
 
So what do you actually calculate the power loss to be on a SC Batman ?

That's what I'm trying to figure out on the Twin Screw type.

I was originally under the impression that it was more power loss compared to the Roots type since it compresses the air instead of just pumping it.

Another thing is the Roots type feels more like a punch in it's sudden acceleration where the Twin Screw feels more like a push.
 
Billy -- please demonstrate a turbo system for the NSX that matches or beats the tip in throttle compressor response of a twin screw supercharger. While each has it's advantages, this is one area where the positive displacement supercharger exceeds.

-- Chris

I'm with you Chris on this one. This is an old hat's opinion (how old ? I bought a new 930 Turbo in 1978, held on to dear life and the steering wheel while waiting for the turbo to kick in). Now drive a GTR with the latest turbo technology and track a 350ZZ TT. Not one of these cars' power delivery matches the instant response of my 97 NSXSC. Most gratifying aspect of SC.
 
I have 560 and do both as much as possible.

I drive my NSX almost everyday. 80 miles today...It's very streetable, just keep your foot out of it.

I find my car easy to drive on the street, even with a Exedy Twin CF clutch.

I get 19 mpg on the highway and maybe 8-9 on the track.

I followed your build very impressive I'm sure you loving it. 19 mpg isn't bad for hwy, the track of course would be a different story ;)
 
Man, I remember those days, bought the 930 Turbo back then myself from a Porsche dealership in Studio City, CA.
Felt the same way, hit the gas peddle and hung on for dear life...

After those experiences, I have never owned a turbo since until recently.

I bought a new 930 Turbo in 1978, held on to dear life and the steering wheel while waiting for the turbo to kick in
 
Last edited:
Thank you...it's almost done...(thank god)
I'm loving every minute of it....
19 isn't bad at all considering what I'm running...

I followed your build very impressive I'm sure you loving it. 19 mpg isn't bad for hwy, the track of course would be a different story ;)
 
Back
Top