POLL: What type of FI would you choose?

[wbt]

Kenne Bell all the way. The more tubing there is the more chance something will blow off or leak.

[wbt]

Originally Posted by obzidian

Have you put it on the rollers? A turbo kit, even twins, is simple. Instead of dealing with a water pump and the electronics for it, you have to deal with a BOV and WG which are just two valves that work on pressure/vacuum.

Turbos will produce more heat and are more difficult to tune however they are more efficient than superchargers.

Both have their advantages/disadvantages.

[axis]

Originally Posted by wbt

Turbos will produce more heat and are more difficult to tune however they are more efficient than superchargers.

Both have their advantages/disadvantages.

Are you sure they produce more heat? We'd have to see the IAT's of all the FI options to see for sure. Tuning is no worse than for a SC. They produce repeatable outputs so it's just studying the graphs and adjusting the fuel and spark.

[wbt]

Originally Posted by axis

Are you sure they produce more heat? We'd have to see the IAT's of all the FI options to see for sure. Tuning is no worse than for a SC. They produce repeatable outputs so it's just studying the graphs and adjusting the fuel and spark.

Here is a pretty good write up on the comparison.

http://www.duccutters.com/TurboSupercharger.tpl

[axis]

Originally Posted by wbt

Here is a pretty good write up on the comparison.

http://www.duccutters.com/TurboSupercharger.tpl

You have to be VERY careful when reading about things on the net. Most of it doesn't apply to every situation and doesn't take ehancements into account. For example. A smaller turbo will might make the same HP as a bigger one but will have to spin faster, make more boost, and produce more heat, while the bigger one will spin slower, make less boost, and produce less heat. Both will output the same amount of air, but one is a better scenario than the other. There's also differences in intercoolers that can't be accounted for in a random article. The only REAL way to compare the heat outputs of the different offerings is to measure the IAT's. It doesn't matter what the heat output is at the charger, it's the amount that's being transfered into the intake charge.

[wbt]

Eh....I just got rid of a turbo car that I did quite a bit of work on. I will say it was finicky to tune and it put out plenty of heat. Reason I chose that link is because it is a very good high level comparison of the two. The IAT on the turbo, even with a nice intercooler, is generally going to be higher than a SC. Just the nature of the beast.

[obzidian]

Originally Posted by axis

While I never said twins won't produce power, they are unnecessary for making HP, even high HP. There are a lot of problems associated with twins and trouble shooting can be a nightmare. The initial costs and subsiquent upkeep costs don't outweigh any benefits you may or may not see. If you're going to compare 1000+whp vehicles, you have just opened a HUGE can of worms as there are TONS of options you can do to the engine that will change the dynamics of the exhaust flow. That's not even going into the different fueling options. You also make a lot of generalities and hypothesis's that you assume will favor the twins when in fact they most probably won't. Splitting your exhaust flow into two turbo's essentially makes each 500+hp turbo being spooled via 3.1L. This will negatively affect your spool time, thus moving your HP and Tq curve further to the right. You can get a smaller AR housing but then you start to increase the heat output and back pressure. Another example of more problems associated with twins. I was under the impression we were talking about stock bottom end Camaro's here so that was where I was coming from. Putting twins capable of producing 1000+hp is a TOTAL waste on a stock Camaro. Putting twins capable of 350 each would be better but what's the point, unless you just like saying you have twins. A single T-76 will produce more HP than your car can handle and do it VERY efficiently. As shown from VRE, it hits hard, and stays hard throughout the power band. SOO, single oil line (feed/return), all exhaust to one point, single line to and from IC, single turbo. Anyone that has turbo'd a NA car can attest to the problems associated with doing this. Now double your turbo's, double your potential problems and add a few more, like tuning and trouble shooting. In the end, it's just not worth the time and $$ UNLESS you just want to say you have twins, hense my point of view of them being for show.

That, factually speaking, is YOUR opinion. My argument was made generalized because I wanted to simply explore your point that twins are worthless... they are not, you might view it as a waste as some feel the new LED TV's are a waste but, we are all allowed to have an opinion.

OF course when going with twins you're going to have two of everything, and if you have an issue, you'll have to go over more parts to find a the solution.

But the same way you are stating that I'm over-simplifying it, you're just making it sound as if twins was the bane of performance, that there is no reason why ANYONE should run a TT setup.

If you want to keep nitpicking, go right ahead, I have no time for that... but your points are your opnions and not fased on facts. For example:

Splitting your exhaust flow into two turbo's essentially makes each 500+hp turbo being spooled via 3.1L. This will negatively affect your spool time, thus moving your HP and Tq curve further to the right.

So, what you are basically saying that a turbo capable of 500hp cannot be spooled effectively with 3.1L's? Furthermore, if that was the problem, then my point of a turbo system being modular comes into play. If you are having a turbo setup that is not being spooled fast enough, move to another turbo that will. IT IS THAT SIMPLE. Plumbing will affected and placement but again, you are making it seem as if it's the end of the world. Furhtermore, OF COURSE reducing A/R will increase backpressure and heat, that is the reason why the turbo will spool faster... Now, just like anything in life, to much of anything is a bad thing so I'm not saying go with the smallest AR housing you can find and go for it. There are plenty of folks that have shown what works with certain motor configurations. So, NO, it will not move the powerband over to the right.... but you are entitled to have your own opinion and that is fine... good luck with yourself.

[obzidian]

Originally Posted by wbt

Turbos will produce more heat and are more difficult to tune however they are more efficient than superchargers.

Both have their advantages/disadvantages.

Actually, that is again misinformation spread by those that wish to sell a PDS system of centrifugals.

[obzidian]

Originally Posted by wbt

Eh....I just got rid of a turbo car that I did quite a bit of work on. I will say it was finicky to tune and it put out plenty of heat. Reason I chose that link is because it is a very good high level comparison of the two. The IAT on the turbo, even with a nice intercooler, is generally going to be higher than a SC. Just the nature of the beast.

Again, not necessarily true. If you had problems with a turbo car, that is fine, but that still doesn't make your previous statement 100% true.

IAT's in a turbo system are not ALWAYS higher than a supercharger... proper intercooling will make those IAT's drop significantly.

[Jchaluja]

Ok, I'm no expert whatsoever, I'm just stating my opinion based on my experience with my car which I've been driving daily (it's the only car I have) for 8 months at the tune of 8,500 miles.

I have had NO issues with my car so far, I've done the regular oil change and cleaned the turbo's filter's once. I'm not sure what all the talk about the maintenance is about. I've taken the car to the track several times as well. The car has a very conservative tune, therefore, I don't see any issues with this setup that you would not see on a s/c car.

The only issue I have is the driver actually, my 60 ft times could be a lot better and I should be running 10's instead of low 11's @126 mph, and that's ONLY with the turbos, exhaust (corsa), tune and DR's, that's it on a 4,200 lbs car (with me in it - 4,000 lbs without). IAT's temps, trouble shooting turbo cars, spool time, etc...I'm not sure about all of that, but with my car, there are no issues with any of that.

Now, can you say that a car with a s/c, exhaust, tune and dr's can beat my times? So far, I have not seen any. Remember, I drive my car daily too, so this is NOT a car setup for the dragstrip.

[axis]

Originally Posted by obzidian

That, factually speaking, is YOUR opinion. My argument was made generalized because I wanted to simply explore your point that twins are worthless... they are not, you might view it as a waste as some feel the new LED TV's are a waste but, we are all allowed to have an opinion.

OF course when going with twins you're going to have two of everything, and if you have an issue, you'll have to go over more parts to find a the solution.

But the same way you are stating that I'm over-simplifying it, you're just making it sound as if twins was the bane of performance, that there is no reason why ANYONE should run a TT setup.

If you want to keep nitpicking, go right ahead, I have no time for that... but your points are your opnions and not fased on facts. For example:

Splitting your exhaust flow into two turbo's essentially makes each 500+hp turbo being spooled via 3.1L. This will negatively affect your spool time, thus moving your HP and Tq curve further to the right.

So, what you are basically saying that a turbo capable of 500hp cannot be spooled effectively with 3.1L's? Furthermore, if that was the problem, then my point of a turbo system being modular comes into play. If you are having a turbo setup that is not being spooled fast enough, move to another turbo that will. IT IS THAT SIMPLE. Plumbing will affected and placement but again, you are making it seem as if it's the end of the world. Furhtermore, OF COURSE reducing A/R will increase backpressure and heat, that is the reason why the turbo will spool faster... Now, just like anything in life, to much of anything is a bad thing so I'm not saying go with the smallest AR housing you can find and go for it. There are plenty of folks that have shown what works with certain motor configurations. So, NO, it will not move the powerband over to the right.... but you are entitled to have your own opinion and that is fine... good luck with yourself.

Don't get your panties in a wad. YOU made yourself the main debater in this thread so you have to take the good with the bad. You're reading stuff into what I type. I never said twins were worthless, just that they were more for show. If you're getting the roughly same HP/Tq, at roughly the same RPM, why would you go with more cost and more possible headaches? BECAUSE IT'S COOL. That's it plain an simple. On the exhasut splitting, spooling a 500hp turbo with 6.2l vs 3.1l is VASTLY different. I never said it wouldn't spool it, yet another liberty you took with my post. While it will still spool it well, depending on the exhaust housing, it will still suffer more lag over the full 6.2l. Can you show me the dyno graph of twins vs single, when making the same HP? Please make this on the stock Camaro and not the 1000+hp version.

[obzidian]

Originally Posted by Jchaluja

Ok, I'm no expert whatsoever, I'm just stating my opinion based on my experience with my car which I've been driving daily (it's the only car I have) for 8 months at the tune of 8,500 miles.

I have had NO issues with my car so far, I've done the regular oil change and cleaned the turbo's filter's once. I'm not sure what all the talk about the maintenance is about. I've taken the car to the track several times as well. The car has a very conservative tune, therefore, I don't see any issues with this setup that you would not see on a s/c car.

The only issue I have is the driver actually, my 60 ft times could be a lot better and I should be running 10's instead of low 11's @126 mph, and that's ONLY with the turbos, exhaust (corsa), tune and DR's, that's it on a 4,200 lbs car (with me in it - 4,000 lbs without). IAT's temps, trouble shooting turbo cars, spool time, etc...I'm not sure about all of that, but with my car, there are no issues with any of that.

Now, can you say that a car with a s/c, exhaust, tune and dr's can beat my times? So far, I have not seen any. Remember, I drive my car daily too, so this is NOT a car setup for the dragstrip.

Great mph! With some practice, you have a 10.9-10.8 run in there somewhere, just have to get that 60ft. down a few ticks.

I hope, with stories like yours, showcasing a well though-out turbo system (Oh, twins work!) can help this community maybe dispel some of the rumors or plain misinformation being spread around about anything else BESIDES a PDS system. Don't get me wrong, that blower whine is just plain intoxicating! A good friend of mine owns a 09 GT500 and I love the blower! But, there are just so many other options that I hope, with cars like yours, to be able to at least give folks something to consider.

Originally Posted by PoleCat2SSRS2010

Isn't this also a concern for the PDS versions and aren't there also concerns for the life of the rotors in the PDS with the constant up and down of the RPMs?
Wouldn't cog drives help with belt life in this kind of environment?

...and to think that this discussion is hard to stay on topic with focussing on only the types of FI and not getting into engine build needs and improvement benefits.

Well, I wouldn't know how to answer that. I would initially believe, that since we are talking about rotors that are intermeshed with each other, that a constant fluctuation of rpms would prematurely wear out the rotors. BUT, these folks (Eaton, Whipple (LOVE THE NEW BLOWERS!) and KB) have been at it for a long time and the I sures well hope that rotor wear has been addressed and taken care of.... or at least there is a somewhere stating what kind of life one could extract from a set of rotors. (I'm assuming a long time though.)

BUT.... belt slippage is a big deal, a PDS or a centi... and YES, a cog system will go a long way to help deal with belt wrap and slippage. My only concern with a belt driven system while on a race track is, in mind, I would like to minimize the amount of accessories being run off the pulley system of belt system of the motor. The more "stuff" off the serpentine the less chances, of a belt failure, of things to go wrong. If you are relying on the belt system to power your main power adder, then, again in my mind, in the case of a belt failure you might be out of your main source of power and thus throw the whole setup off, tune/fuel/airflow, etc.

However, not to nitpick as a turbo system, for example, can be put out of commission if a WG starts to bleed off "boost" and in turn reducing the amount of air flowing into the intake manifold.

[obzidian]

Originally Posted by axis

Don't get your panties in a wad. YOU made yourself the main debater in this thread so you have to take the good with the bad. You're reading stuff into what I type. I never said twins were worthless, just that they were more for show. If you're getting the roughly same HP/Tq, at roughly the same RPM, why would you go with more cost and more possible headaches? BECAUSE IT'S COOL. That's it plain an simple. On the exhasut splitting, spooling a 500hp turbo with 6.2l vs 3.1l is VASTLY different. I never said it wouldn't spool it, yet another liberty you took with my post. While it will still spool it well, depending on the exhaust housing, it will still suffer more lag over the full 6.2l. Can you show me the dyno graph of twins vs single, when making the same HP? Please make this on the stock Camaro and not the 1000+hp version.

I will end it with this:

I have highlighted the essence of your point.

I said, basically, that a twin setup has its place in the world and can be configured to make a certain kind of powerband and power delivery. Furthermore, I was discussing your point that twins don't make power and are just for show.

You said that twins are, and I quote, "....just that they were more for show." So, if they are just for show, then they are not needed, thus worthless since the cost spent of a twins setup is a waste.

You just contradicted yourself in the same sentence. You don't feel twins are worth the money since they are just for show, I.E. worthless (again, your words, not mine) BUT, and I urge you to think this through, DO NOT spread your opinion as fact since, in fact, it is your opinion and not the truth behind a twin turbo setup.

See you around.

A.

[obzidian]

Look, I'll play fair:

Single turbo:

http://www.camaro5.com/forums/attach...1&d=1267106384

Twin turbo:

http://www.camaro5.com/forums/attach...1&d=1267743985

Notice the torque peaks, almost a 1000rpm difference between the two. Also, look at the flatness of the powerband... IMO, the twin turbo setup, comparing these two ONLY, is matched (though a tune will make a big difference) better to the LS3 than the single.

NOW, very simple, a single turbo can be configured to make TONS of torque lower in the powerband and able to power through earlier than later after going WOT. This is just a example of what I was asked of and easily available here on the forum. For example, the VRE single turbo has the torque peak around 3700rpms OR around the same rpms range as the twin turbo setup shown above.