How do you like your boost? [Archive] - Zilvia.net Forums | Nissan 240SX (Silvia) and Z (Fairlady) Car Forum

twitchy

11-11-2003, 12:45 AM

Im posting this thread because my friend inspired me with his car the other day. He has a 1995 neon, stock looking, even the stock hubcaps and mufflers. He has spent something like $7000 Canadian on the engine internals and its making some ridiculous horsepower level at the wheels. He can rev the engine higher than the factory tach shows on the dial and it runs the quarter in under 14 seconds. Now, this build up has left him with a very strong engine. He needs a new diff and clutch since the upgraded engine finished off the stock ones, and he has them coming, as well as a supercharger for it. Says it will run upwards of 375 horses in the spring.

I hope this doesnt turn into one of those mile long threads and I hope I dont wind up getting flamed to hell and back for asking but here goes:

What does anyone think of building the KA internals up and supercharging it? I would match with brakes and chassey strengthening and the like, but why does no one seem to go this route as opposed to the SR engine?

is there a reason?

is it just easier?

are people just not creative?

I dont get it. You see all kinds of swaps but I havent seen a supercharger on one. They are better than turbos in some sense too- less complicated, easier to install, no lag and so on.

any thoughts?

gijoe69

11-11-2003, 01:00 AM

umm lemme get this clear...1995 NEON DODGE NEON? (Domestic? Boo!) Neon's don't have KA motor's haha they got piece of shyt mitsubishi motors in dem and supercharing a KA is pointless.....so much work and by the time you add everything up you might as well just get a CA18DET or S13 SR20DET Frontclip for that price...

Evil S14

11-11-2003, 01:20 AM

^^^ ignore that one sided post

i think the reason people dont supercharge it becuse it would most likely require a rots type supercharger the way the intake manifold, the crank pully, and overall engine space is concerned. making something like that would just be a big pain in the ass and you might as well turbo the car. Plus all that low end tq from the supercharger would just burn tires off like crazy, but mustangs and camaros do it all the time so why not

HaLo

11-11-2003, 09:17 AM

I like my boost with no lag and medium power. No drag queen for me. :)

twitchy

11-11-2003, 09:19 AM

if I had the money to do it, i would have it supercharged (with chasssey upgrades to match)

but in such a way that to drive you wouldnt know it was using a blower. I drove a Grand Prix GTP once and that thing, cept for the boost gauge you couldnt tell it wasnt just a very powerful non supercharged engine.

Yep, supercharged for this guy. I hate turbo lag, and I really hate waiting for revs to build for my power to come on.

HaLo

11-11-2003, 09:25 AM

Originally posted by twitchy
if I had the money to do it, i would have it supercharged (with chasssey upgrades to match)

but in such a way that to drive you wouldnt know it was using a blower. I drove a Grand Prix GTP once and that thing, cept for the boost gauge you couldnt tell it wasnt just a very powerful non supercharged engine.

Yep, supercharged for this guy. I hate turbo lag, and I really hate waiting for revs to build for my power to come on.

if you get a ball-bearing turbo, you won't wait for spool up.
at 3000rpm, I have full boost up to 14 psi on my S15 Turbo Add 200-300rpm for 18 psi!

old_s13

11-11-2003, 09:54 AM

I've driven an SC car before, and its not as "insta-power" as people tend to think. While you dont have to wait for spooling, there still is noticeable delay before you fall into the powerband. The car I drove was a VW Corrado G60, not a bad car. I think it really depends on the size of the supercharger, that should also make a difference as to how the power comes in and how responsive it is.

I wouldnt ever say turbo's have no lag either, because regardless of what type of turbo you have, you still have to wait for it to spool up before you get that response. That is the difference between NA and Turbo, with NA as long as you are in your powerband, you have power. With a turbo car, you actually have to keep your foot on the gas.. if you dont, the pressure built by the turbo will blow off and then you have to re-spool it, regardless if you are at 3000rpms or 6000rpms.

If you have the connections and want to go SC, do it. There has been OH SO much talk about it throughout the 8 or so years of me being involved in the 240SX lists. From what I've heard, you'de probably have to ditch the air conditioning since that is where it would need to go. Plus, SC's require VERY fat belts that attach to the crank pulley. I think the reason there are more turbo cars is because its EASIER to install. Remember, SC's still compress air and so it would be smart to run intercooler. When you start looking at the amount of work involved, its not accurate to just say "SC requires less work to install" -- both methods of forced induction take work to successfully install, it just depends as to how skilled you are and how much money you want to dump in this toy.

Then of course, there is SR -- factory turbo and all you have to worry about is upgrading things properly. Factory options are ALWAYS smarter upgrades and require less work, mostly because the engineers have already done the thinking for most of us laymen.

- Mike

Warwick5s

11-11-2003, 10:09 AM

corrado g60's aren't the best car to base your opinion of supercharged cars. the g-lader has lag too - it's basically a turbo with a belt drive. but yeah, it also is only a 60mm output, so it's pretty tiny.

i used to have a g60. and every time i see one it's like seeing that really hot ex-girlfriend that was a complete bitch with someone else. you know you don't want to deal with her shit anymore, but you would like to hit it just one more time....

twitchy

11-11-2003, 10:22 AM

very very good points indeed

Not that I can even afford to do anything to the car (till the summer) but im trying to keep the options open. Ive always bought a car no one else had (240s are very very rare where I live)

My first car was an I-Mark Turbo. The damn thing was fantastic. The turbo made almost 9 pounds of boost from the factory and virtually no lag whatsoever- it was actuated by vacum and throttle position and seemed to spool up whenever you wanted it, any RPM.

My reasoning for wanting a supercharger is that although i love the added sound effects with a turbo and miss them, Ive grown to be a fan of quiet smooth power and if im correct, SC is generally quieter.

As for complications in installation I thought the SC would be easier since it doesnt require modifying the exhaust manifold.

I wish I knew someone with the SR20 engine in their 240, but honestly I dont know anyone else WITH a 240 to compare it to. Someday I will have my blower...or my SR20....or what the hell...BOTH!!!

twitchy

11-11-2003, 10:23 AM

Originally posted by Warwick5s
it's basically a turbo with a belt drive.

arent they all?

old_s13

11-11-2003, 10:45 AM

Warwick5s> corrado g60's aren't the best car to base your opinion of supercharged cars. the g-lader has lag too - it's basically a turbo with a belt drive. but yeah, it also is only a 60mm output, so it's pretty tiny.

i used to have a g60. and every time i see one it's like seeing that really hot ex-girlfriend that was a complete bitch with someone else. you know you don't want to deal with her shit anymore, but you would like to hit it just one more time....

dude right on, the Corrado is SUCH an annoying car.. my friend's G60 had NOTHING but problems, from the shitty headlights, horrible wipers, or misc engine components that were always breaking. From what I've heard the VR6 is DEFINATELY the smarter choice when wanting to buy a Corrado that will LAST. That supercharged motor probably puts out uhm 90hp when the supercharger isnt working! I have to admit though, the Corrado definately has an appearance that I wish cars still had today. Its a shame you just dont see them anymore, or any clean ones at that.

twitchy> if im correct, SC is generally quieter.

I wouldnt say that, I know several 350Z owners who say that their superchargers are quite whiney. It just depends what you want, supercharge whine or turbo swooshing and sneezing. Years ago, I would look to mod my car to get performance gains but at the same time, liked originality.. I liked seeing things like built SOHC KA's and what not. I always wanted to build and carb my SOHC, but when I blew that up.. I realized how little time I had to sit around and pay for custom work, engineer shit, etc.. its just not for me, not right now. If you dont mind the SR20DET and how common its getting (I dont know why anyone would), then go for it.. its a less expensive, less time consuming upgrade that is MORE than sufficient for most of the 240SX owners I know.

- Mike

95Blue240sx

11-11-2003, 12:49 PM

i like my boost with a nice piece of ASS:D

KoukiS14

11-11-2003, 01:29 PM

I'd LOVE a supercharged KA.
Because of the nature of the engine, I'd think that'd be the route to go if it were possible.

h3x11

11-11-2003, 02:16 PM

Originally posted by twitchy
Yep, supercharged for this guy. I hate turbo lag, and I really hate waiting for revs to build for my power to come on.

realistically speaking, an average turbo hit max boost about 3.5k rpm; most potential power on the ka motor are achieved in the neighborhood of 6k rpm, do you race your car under 3k rpm!??! sometimes some turbo lag is good for releaving up-front traction problem.

KoukiS14

11-11-2003, 02:40 PM

Originally posted by h3x11
realistically speaking, an average turbo hit max boost about 3.5k rpm; most potential power on the ka motor are achieved in the neighborhood of 6k rpm, do you race your car under 3k rpm!??! sometimes some turbo lag is good for releaving up-front traction problem.

Turbo would be a better option for where I live, especially since it can be electronically adjusted for driving in snow, and slick conditions. I still only have one car :D

but a S/C'ed KA would be AMAZING.

old_s13

11-11-2003, 03:03 PM

Originally posted by KoukiS14
Turbo would be a better option for where I live, especially since it can be electronically adjusted for driving in snow, and slick conditions. I still only have one car :D

but a S/C'ed KA would be AMAZING.

Thats what second gear is for. Thats also what a spare FWD car is for. :) 165/60/15 hehe

AceInHole

11-11-2003, 03:08 PM

Originally posted by h3x11
realistically speaking, an average turbo hit max boost about 3.5k rpm; most potential power on the ka motor are achieved in the neighborhood of 6k rpm, do you race your car under 3k rpm!??! sometimes some turbo lag is good for releaving up-front traction problem.

you could always run a turbo with a large scroll and a small wheel (like mine)... that POS is spinning at idle :D

very linear pull. last season an instructor in the passenger seat compared it to an M3 :coolugh:

Warwick5s

11-11-2003, 03:23 PM

Originally posted by twitchy
arent they all?

nope. there are different types of superchargers.

scroll
Roots
twin screw (lysholm, whipple)
centrifugal <- this is the one that is like the g60. it operates the same as a turbo, except that the thing spinning it is the crank, not exhaust gasses.

for a comparison chart, check this:

http://www.coloradocobras.com/whipple/superchargers/supercharger-comparison-chart.html

oh yeah, and for those who haven't seen one before, this is a corrado.

http://www.corrado-club.com/gallery/images/DSCF2705.jpg

THE HOTTEST CAR EVER! :wtc:

h3x11

11-11-2003, 03:34 PM

Originally posted by KoukiS14
but a S/C'ed KA would be AMAZING.

it would be interesting, but!

Originally posted by twitchy
They are better than turbos in some sense too- less complicated, easier to install, no lag and so on.

are you sure about that?!?!?! why is supercharged less complicated? is it because you don't have to run intercooler pipes and oil lines? if you really think about it, any form of force induction will require additional electronics for proper fuel and ignition management.

before jumping on the ordeal, you should decide first what your power goal is, and the best route to get there. the decision is still up to you.

IMO turbo is more efficient. period.

good luck.

mbmbmb23

11-11-2003, 04:03 PM

Anyone know if the supercharged Xterras have supercharged KA's??

-m

Zemus

11-11-2003, 04:13 PM

Ive always wanted to supercharge a KA, it would rock, keep us all posted.

oh yea, haha the G60, the devils engines

KoukiS14

11-11-2003, 06:12 PM

Originally posted by mbmbmb23
Anyone know if the supercharged Xterras have supercharged KA's??

-m

doan quote me on this, cause I know little about the sexterras.

But I think it's a S/C'ed VG33E? Anyone know for sure?

CoasTek240

11-11-2003, 06:35 PM

Originally posted by mbmbmb23
Anyone know if the supercharged Xterras have supercharged KA's??

-m
yeah does anyone know bout that.. i bet that'd be cool!

KoukiS14

11-11-2003, 06:45 PM

Originally posted by CoasTek240
yeah does anyone know bout that.. i bet that'd be cool!

Still pretty sure it's the VG.
if it was a S/C'ed KA. . we'd prolly all know by now :D

that'd own tho.

mrmephistopheles

11-11-2003, 09:37 PM

Originally posted by mbmbmb23
Anyone know if the supercharged Xterras have supercharged KA's??
-m

I know.
Supercharged Xterras (and Frontiers for that matter) have the VG33ER. The only other engines available are VG33E and KA24DE.

ZOLTAN

11-11-2003, 09:48 PM

"if im correct, SC is generally quieter."
If you ever get a chance, race a new Cobra. lol. They're loud.

.Eddie.

old_s13

11-11-2003, 10:18 PM

h3x11> IMO turbo is more efficient. period.

Forced induction in general has its pros and cons, it really comes down to the purpose of the vehicle and preference of the driver.

AceInHole

11-11-2003, 11:10 PM

Originally posted by h3x11
are you sure about that?!?!?! why is supercharged less complicated? is it because you don't have to run intercooler pipes and oil lines? if you really think about it, any form of force induction will require additional electronics for proper fuel and ignition management.

actually most supercharger systems also need to be oiled.

at least with a supercharger you aren't playing with the exhaust side of things as much. that's probably the only way they're any less complicated. although, one could argue that playing with belts and additional tensioners makes up for that.

as for me: i'll stick with my turbocharger. i highly doubt i could get a supercharger to have any less lag than I currently have, and the ease of adjustability with the turbo, as well as the side affect of quieting down exhaust noise solidify the decision to stay turbo.

old_s13

11-11-2003, 11:18 PM

Speaking of tensioners, the one on my friends G60 broke.. talk about a pain in the ass and overpriced.

misnomer

11-11-2003, 11:30 PM

mrmephistowhatever is right, the supercharged Xterras and whatnot are VG motors. The KA has only ever really had two major styles: SOHC and DOHC NA (with some tweaks in the truck counterparts).

My view on superchargers is they are just another means to an end. For simplicity's sake, I think turbos have it. Propellor and impellor on opposite ends of a stick, can't get much simpler :P Turbos also take advantage of the energy still in the exhaust gasses that are being expelled from the car, which gives them efficiency points by me. But, like you said, turbos lag. While it's slick and all to feel the turbo spool up (my experience is a stock WRX), the one thing I hate about that car is NO power off the line. The fact that I still suck at managing a turbo car aside. . .

I can't find any reason to knock superchargers, though. Like I said, just another means to an end. Oh, and listen to the Ace for the Ace knows much.

Lastly, it should be known that gi69mo's post was the most ignorant thing I've heard all week. The week is young, but it will be difficult to top that.

Bliss

11-11-2003, 11:31 PM

Can some of you guys who want to SC a car gimme some advantages of it? In talking to some very knowledgeable people, they're hard pressed to come up with anything better than "its easier to mount on a V-8, which is why they were so popular" or "theyre easier with carb'd cars".

I'm not saying theyre right or you're wrong, just looking for some more input and a justification of the SC idea.

bchumley

11-12-2003, 03:00 PM

Somewhat unrelated, but here's my 2 cents. I had a 98 prelude that I put a jackson supercharger on. Some thoughts on it, which should relate to most all supercharger applications:
Pros:
relatively easy to install (provided it WAS a kit)
very low hassle factor
basically maintenance free if nothing breaks
the subtle "whine" is pretty rad
Cons:
the power is so smooth that it just feels "normal" after a while
very limited in your ability to increase boost
feels boring (IMO) compared to a turbocharged car

97DubTruck

11-12-2003, 04:56 PM

I'd love to have a ka-t and go boost crazy. but then again being a student im definitely going to have to get reliable power, something that a turbo ka isn't or at least in my experiences seeing them. of course its all based on how well you do things.

if somebody can put together a nice supercharger setup id be interested in it but id never get it. i have to keep this car for a while.

so i'm going sr if i go with an engine swap at all.

Bliss

11-12-2003, 09:12 PM

With the right parts, you can most most any engine reliable.

AceInHole

11-12-2003, 11:12 PM

Originally posted by 97DubTruck
I'd love to have a ka-t and go boost crazy. but then again being a student im definitely going to have to get reliable power, something that a turbo ka isn't or at least in my experiences seeing them. of course its all based on how well you do things.

if somebody can put together a nice supercharger setup id be interested in it but id never get it. i have to keep this car for a while.

so i'm going sr if i go with an engine swap at all.

so you're saying a supercharged setup is more reliable?? and what grounds are you basing this on? or... are you just spouting some crap you thought you heard from someone you thought might know what they're talking about?

twitchy

11-13-2003, 02:02 AM

Originally posted by Bliss
Can some of you guys who want to SC a car gimme some advantages of it? In talking to some very knowledgeable people, they're hard pressed to come up with anything better than "its easier to mount on a V-8, which is why they were so popular" or "theyre easier with carb'd cars".

I'm not saying theyre right or you're wrong, just looking for some more input and a justification of the SC idea.

no lag

no burping, coughing sound effects (unless you like that)

instant power usually

feels natural, almost like its just a real powerful engine. No waiting..in effect you wouldnt know it was there

but this is from a guy that values smoothness, stealth and a quiet comfy ride above anything else

which is why I want one. I would get a well set up turbo too, but I like the KA engine

STIwish

11-13-2003, 02:37 AM

Originally posted by twitchy
no lag

no burping, coughing sound effects (unless you like that)

instant power usually

feels natural, almost like its just a real powerful engine. No waiting..in effect you wouldnt know it was there

but this is from a guy that values smoothness, stealth and a quiet comfy ride above anything else

which is why I want one. I would get a well set up turbo too, but I like the KA engine

You've never heard a supercharger squeel? oh.. ur in for a surprise :)

sykikchimp

11-13-2003, 09:32 AM

FWIW - turbo's are more efficient than superchargers. For "Real, ultimate, power!" turbo is the only way to go. Superchargers will begin to really work against themselves eventually, and you will hit a brick wall due to parasitic losses. Also, you will tend to have a fatter HP curve with a turbo than a centrifugal S/C. The S/C will build boost in a linear fashion all the way until redline (or where ever you set the pulley to reach full boost. The turbo will spool to full boost, and STAY at full boost for ~3K rpm.

Unless you have a supercharger kit, then installing a supercharger will be more difficult than installing a turbo KIT. ALL of your brackets, and piping will have to be custom made. Not exactly the simplest thing to do. As far as I know, there are no Kits for the KA. I think this is the main reason nobody does it. Too much custom fab work for something that will have a limited efficiency range (comparatively speaking).

I will say superchargers are great for track cars b/c you never get kit with a sudden change in power when exiting corners. Feed in a teensy touch of throttle, and a dorment turbo suddenly jumps to life, and your rear end is now in front of you.. S/C's are a touch more predictable.

Overall, it would be a fun project if you had the time, and/or the money to (have it) engineer(ed.) it. But since MOST guys who buy 240's are looking for cheap performance, they usually just go with the cheaper, tried and true, efficient, AWESOME turbo..

remember what corky says.. "If you have no Lag, you have no turbo. You also have no huge torque increase to look forward to.

On that same note, your not really talking about Lag, your talking about Boost Threshold. Lag is how long it takes to build boost b/c of a throttle position change when the car is already at an rpm level that it can create boost. Boost Threshold is the lowest RPM that you have sufficient exhaust gas velocity to spin the turbo and create positive manifold pressure.

97DubTruck

11-13-2003, 10:18 AM

Originally posted by AceInHole
so you're saying a supercharged setup is more reliable?? and what grounds are you basing this on? or... are you just spouting some crap you thought you heard from someone you thought might know what they're talking about?

where the hell did i say that? I said a turbo ka isnt that reliable based on the fact i knew a guy with a turbo 96 and he had a cylinder go out and shooting oil out of his exhaust(he fixed it but with 320 hp and custom turbo work shit was always breaking). SR20 would be more reliable because its factory thats why in my conclusion i said if i got an engine swap at all or add any sort of forced induction it would be an sr. regarding superchargers i just said it would be interesting to see one but i would never put one on my car.

Originally posted by 97DubTruck
I'd love to have a ka-t and go boost crazy. but then again being a student im definitely going to have to get reliable power, something that a turbo ka isn't or at least in my experiences seeing them. of course its all based on how well you do things.

if somebody can put together a nice supercharger setup id be interested in it but id never get it. i have to keep this car for a while.

so i'm going sr if i go with an engine swap at all.

Bliss

11-13-2003, 11:51 AM

Originally posted by 97DubTruck
where the hell did i say that? I said a turbo ka isnt that reliable based on the fact i knew a guy with a turbo 96 and he had a cylinder go out and shooting oil out of his exhaust(he fixed it but with 320 hp and custom turbo work shit was always breaking). SR20 would be more reliable because its factory thats why in my conclusion i said if i got an engine swap at all or add any sort of forced induction it would be an sr. regarding superchargers i just said it would be interesting to see one but i would never put one on my car.

Originally posted by 97DubTruck
I'd love to have a ka-t and go boost crazy. but then again being a student im definitely going to have to get reliable power, something that a turbo ka isn't or at least in my experiences seeing them. of course its all based on how well you do things.

if somebody can put together a nice supercharger setup id be interested in it but id never get it. i have to keep this car for a while.

so i'm going sr if i go with an engine swap at all.

By saying "I'm definately going to have to get reliable power", you make it sound like the S/C is more reliable. However, you also say you wouldn't do a supercharger setup, so apparently its not that reliable. Also, you can blow an SR just as easiely as a SC'd KA or a KA-T if you do it correctly. You said it best: "of course its all based on how well you do things." which throws everything you said about reliability out the window.

also, 1 blown KA doesn't mean they're all done wrong.

AceInHole

11-13-2003, 11:54 AM

starfireS14

11-13-2003, 03:42 PM

I like it I like it alot

97DubTruck

11-13-2003, 05:20 PM

Originally posted by AceInHole
My apologies for thinking you were saying something on- topic.

and that would be how would i like my boost. which was a turbo ka if i could make it reliable since its not factory turbo like an sr.

i definitely didn't mean superchargers are more reliable i was saying an sr would probably be more reliable than a turbo ka. to my knowledge nobody has has pout a supercharger on a 240.

fuck sometimes computers dont get across what you really mean.

AceInHole

11-13-2003, 05:44 PM

and my post should have clarified: on the current topic (as everyone was talking about the supercharger). but, that's the trouble with written words...

ckyfish

11-13-2003, 06:52 PM

im suprised that no ones brought up that they are parasitic :down:

twitchy

11-13-2003, 11:57 PM

Originally posted by ckyfish
im suprised that no ones brought up that they are parasitic :down:

well they are, but it takes power to make power in some cases. I wouldnt expect to supercharge my car and loose power although as you say, at some point the returns will decrease marginally (damn you economics!)

What about supercharging a SR20?? WOuldnt that be sick?

AceInHole

11-13-2003, 11:58 PM

Originally posted by ckyfish
im suprised that no ones brought up that they are parasitic :down:

From sykikchimp's post:
Superchargers will begin to really work against themselves eventually, and you will hit a brick wall due to parasitic losses.

sykikchimp

11-14-2003, 09:01 AM

Originally posted by AceInHole
From sykikchimp's post:

lol.. I think your the only one that actually read my post..

old_s13

11-14-2003, 09:13 AM

sykikchimp> FWIW - turbo's are more efficient than superchargers. For "Real, ultimate, power!" turbo is the only way to go. Superchargers will begin to really work against themselves eventually, and you will hit a brick wall due to parasitic losses. Also, you will tend to have a fatter HP curve with a turbo than a centrifugal S/C. The S/C will build boost in a linear fashion all the way until redline (or where ever you set the pulley to reach full boost. The turbo will spool to full boost, and STAY at full boost for ~3K rpm.

Uhm, not. All these high powered dragsters are not worried about parasitic losses, they make so much power that I am sure these losses are very minor. These cars make over 1000hp.

twitchy> no lag no burping, coughing sound effects (unless you like that) instant power usually feels natural, almost like its just a real powerful engine. No waiting..in effect you wouldnt know it was there but this is from a guy that values smoothness, stealth and a quiet comfy ride above anything else which is why I want one. I would get a well set up turbo too, but I like the KA engine

So, when are you going with a larger displacement, NON forced induction motor?

97dubtruck> where the hell did i say that? I said a turbo ka isnt that reliable based on the fact i knew a guy with a turbo 96 and he had a cylinder go out and shooting oil out of his exhaust(he fixed it but with 320 hp and custom turbo work shit was always breaking). SR20 would be more reliable because its factory thats why in my conclusion i said if i got an engine swap at all or add any sort of forced induction it would be an sr. regarding superchargers i just said it would be interesting to see one but i would never put one on my car.

hehe yeah, this is what happens when idiots start working on stuff they dont know how to work on.