Z28 or SS with Vortech Supercharger

[GMRULZ]

Originally Posted by SonnyakaPig

Why do you feel the way you do? Just really curious.

LS3= Vortech, Procharger
L99= Whipple, Kenny Bell, Harrop, Magnason

[Fallen Angel]

I'd like to go with the Z28, but it seems it won't be out until late next year. Who's got time to wait for that, haha? I might just be the SS right now with a Kenne Bell supercharger and modified suspension and my LFS6 Monolux wheels.

[RPM Motors]

Originally Posted by axis

What's so special about the TT's in that thread? If you plot out the curves of that TT setup vs the other single setups, they are nearly identical. This one does have a higher peak HP and Tq but that's just a measure of the bigger compressor wheels, not the whole system. Adding a bigger turbo to the single systems will net these peak numbers or greater. I'd bet the single is cheaper as well.

Boost is boost and as long as the IAT's are managed, there is consistency.

The singles are a good setup - twins are just a different approach. Properly sized twins will spool up at the bottom and carry big on the top;....conversely and in general terms, a single that hangs with a twin setup on the top will be at a disadvantage at lower RPM.

No big deal - just another way to look at at.

[axis]

Originally Posted by RPM Motors

Boost is boost and as long as the IAT's are managed, there is consistency.

The singles are a good setup - twins are just a different approach. Properly sized twins will spool up at the bottom and carry big on the top;....conversely and in general terms, a single that hangs with a twin setup on the top will be at a disadvantage at lower RPM.

No big deal - just another way to look at at.

Oh I understand that but there seems to be a few that think twins are the best thing since sliced bread. While they are cool and all, I personally don't think they are any better than a properly sized single which is also cheaper, easier to install, easier to tune, and less hassles.

[alex33x]

Originally Posted by SonnyakaPig

I get it. But it seems like if you want to use a centri and still get some great low end torque you can put on some headers, and tune the computer accordingly and cars that do that have near 600 rwhp and they seem to have almost 400 ft lbs of tq at around 2500 rpms.

Those are kind of general numbers but from what I recall after looking over some dyno graphs of centris with that setup that I described, I'm pretty sure those numbers are attainable.

In that case you can have the linear hp curve that just keeps rising and also a big number tq output from relatively low rpms. Still, I know it's not like the Maggie or K/B that shows a fat, straight-line tq curve from 2000 rpms onward.

Exactly what Z_rocks said with a centrifugal you actually have to wait for it to spool it, yeah 400 ft lbs of torque at 2500, but I get 500 ft lbs of tq at 2000 with my maggie so there you go.

You can add gears to the centrifugal to make up for it but still it will never compare to the very consistent power curve you get from a maggie.