Turbo VS TT VS SC

[bigdaddyD]

ok i have a simple question, which would you guys think would be better for performance for an everyday driver? Obviously a turbo charger would be the least expensive, or so i would think, and depending on the size of the TT and SC that could probably be arguable as far as which give better performance and which is more expensive. I would just like to get your guys opinion.

[misslindseysue]

Depends what kind of performance you want. I love my turbo, some people love the 1st gen superchargers. Turbo is better for fuel economy. I like whistle, some people prefer whine. Superchargers can be better for packaging.

[[ion] C2]

You're going to get responses all across the board. It's more of, what do you want to do? They're all going to cost a bit of money, they're all upgradeable, they're all going to give you power. No one makes any ready-to-go kits for the 3400, besides the RSM supercharger which is known for problems.

You're right there, so you better come to the Alero Show and Straveganza 2008 in LANSING June 13-15th!

[GA_turbo]

well since you seem squeptical about what you want, i wouldnt do neither, but if you are looking at the road ahead and keeping your car for a while i would go turbo, Why you ask well ,,, cause you can always start at low boost and work your way up, its a better investment there is more room for more performance with the turbo....

Looking at the actual picture, you will have to run premium with either or, so both will cost you more money then what you are spending now.

[bigdaddyD]

if i didnt run premium but i had either turbo or SC, would that hurt or damage the engine? or would i just not get the extra performance out of it? i think if i did go with something i think it would be a turbo, what would you guys recommend for something to start out small with but has the options for going to fairly big power?

[bigdaddyD]

Oh and im definatly goin to ASS '08

[BlackJack]

if i didnt run premium but i had either turbo or SC, would that hurt or damage the engine? or would i just not get the extra performance out of it? i think if i did go with something i think it would be a turbo, what would you guys recommend for something to start out small with but has the options for going to fairly big power?

91 Octane minimum is the requirement for boosting of any kind. If you typically find yourself short on cash by the end of the week and having to scrimp on gas by getting the cheapest you can (87 Octane) just to get to work, boosting is not for you.

Boost puts extra pressure in the cylinders, and can cause premature detonation from heat/combustion. The only way to reduce or remove detonation with boost is by octane increase. I would not count on putting "off-the-shelf" ocatane boosters into the tank to compensate, because that's like playing octane-roulette.

If you don't plan on being able to run 91 minimum all the time, every time, then I wouldn't even consider boosting, or even a hot N/A build for that matter.

[misslindseysue]

Yeah... "You gotta pay to play" comes to mind here.

I ALWAYS run 93 in my MINI - I don't even think about it when I pull up to a pump, that's just how it has to be. And even with 93, I don't get it from the cheapest place, I get it from the best/busiest place.

[Redog]

Yeah, if you're planning on going any form of boosting you need to run 91 or better. You cannot run 87 on a turbo or s/c app.

I'm not boosting, but I do have a DHP PCM in my car, which also requires 91 octane.

Like Lindsy said, you gotta pay to play. I don't even look at the prices of regular.

Gotta run what the car is programmed on

[[ion] C2]

Plus, if you're like me (which is unlikely), I don't care about gas prices. I could pay $5 a gallon for 93 which I need to run, and it really wouldn't bother me much. It'd be nice if gas was back down to $1/gal like I remember it, though.

[BlackJack]

I'm not boosting, but I do have a DHP PCM in my car, which also requires 91 octane.

And as you well know, that's because in order to squeeze more power in an N/A application with tuning, they advanced the timing.

[bigdaddyD]

ok, i guess ill run 91 for a while, just to see how hard it hits the budget, but i dont forsee it being a problem. i just hate paying $3.50 or so for gas, or what ever 91 is at now.

[meadus101]

I don't know much....

But personally, I don't know if Boosting a Daily Driver is really a good Idea?
I mean, It's going to put alot of extra Wear on your engine, so it's really going to reduce the life of the Alero... I think.

Plus, Your fuel costs are going to go up too.


I think for a Daily Driver, You shouldn't go further than Intake, Exhaust, and Basic Upgrades...

Of Course... Just my $.02

[Redog]

And as you well know, that's because in order to squeeze more power in an N/A application with tuning, they advanced the timing.

Yes I know that, but it's a good point to bring up for the newb ;)

[BlackJack]

it's a good point to bring up for the newb ;)

Precisely!

[bigdaddyD]

YA NEWB!.....oh wait thats me.:(

[AleroB888]

My car is also the grocery-getter, the only time I don't drive it is when it's apart and I need to fetch parts for it. But I don't use it for work, so the mileage had stayed fairly low...

I use Octane 104 additive and run 91 Octane up here, or whatever is the highest I can find when on a road trip. I got 28.6 mpg on the last trip to sea level. I have never got measureably better results as far as knock sensitivity by using racing gas, but I have not tried any at the present boost level of 12 lb.

I have upped the boost a couple psi every year for the last 3, and probably averaged 10 psi over the last 2.

If you are boosting these cars to 10 psi or so, Tuning capability is a must, and with that you could tune the car for a day at the track, or detune it for daily driving or road trips. The knock sensor based timing retard becomes the all-inportant tuning/safety device, and on these cars I believe it is more sensitive than it needs to be, and that's good.

I tune with a timing curve based on IM IAT, and use it on the street and track. I'm really, really trying to break this thing, ..but it just....won't....

[kwhauck]

well since you seem squeptical about what you want, i wouldnt do neither, but if you are looking at the road ahead and keeping your car for a while i would go turbo, Why you ask well ,,, cause you can always start at low boost and work your way up, its a better investment there is more room for more performance with the turbo....


That is a very uninformed response. From his questioning I would say that he will not do a majority of the work himself. If that is true the supercharger and turbo are on a level playing field because both will be custom.

A supercharger you can start with low boost and work your way up, it is called a pulley change. Takes about 5 minutes.

Although if $50,000 were had to mod a stock block alero, yes I would say a turbo would be the fastest in the end, but for this guy a supercharger could get him into the 13s or 12s just as easily as a turbo....

[bigdaddyD]

actually i do plan on doing a majority of the work my self, besides borrowing the required tools on an occasion. i have read up on the pully change for a SC, atleast on a riviera. it seems like a fairly simple concept of changing pullys for more power, smaller pully = more boost = more demand from engine and more mods to the engine.

[BlackJack]

I haven't had a modern version of an S/C, but from what others tell me, when you change the pulley, doesn't that change the powerband progression at a scalar rate? If so, that would require a retune (or reflash) every time you change pulleys.

Not to say that either one is better, but I like the fact that once I tune for 15psi, I can turn down the boost without changing my tune.

[[ion] C2]

The tune works even if you don't have the supercharger attached. People take off their superchargers sometime and can run perfectly fine with it, it just has the capability to read boost and compensate fuel for it (up to 14.7 PSI or something, 2 bar map) as long as you use the same injectors. Obviously tuning is necessary since once you get to or higher than 8-9 PSI you'll require bigger injectors and that will need another tune. But, yeah, smaller pulleys and increased boost is compensated.

I'm clueless about tuning, but this is as far as I know from what I've read and others' experiences.

[BigStribS]

We are currently almost ready for fully ready to go Turbo setups here at Milzy Motorsports! It will come with everything you would need! If your interested contact mikem@milzymotorsports.com

[[ion] C2]

The 3400 guys are going to LOVE that, good job Milzy!

[bigdaddyD]

about how long before you guys a milzy are fully ready, i just got a pay raise and a nice fat bonus check, and i need to spend it on something?

[AleroB888]

I haven't had a modern version of an S/C, but from what others tell me, when you change the pulley, doesn't that change the powerband progression at a scalar rate? If so, that would require a retune (or reflash) every time you change pulleys.

Not to say that either one is better, but I like the fact that once I tune for 15psi, I can turn down the boost without changing my tune.

I think the situation is similar between my SC and a Turbo in that once I tune for the small pulley (high boost) I can go to the larger pulley with no change to the timing tables, and still have a safe tune. But, the transition from idle to max boost would be slower for the large pulley, and might need more timing, especially on the low end, for optimum performance.

Assuming that there is not a drastic difference in the two pulley diameters, it is not too much of a hassle to change them, unless you have to change the belt. (I'm getting lazy in my old age)

[Spilner521]

I'm a little biased, but as far as boost control goes, I'd rather turn a knob than change a pulley.

[AleroB888]

I'm a little biased, but as far as boost control goes, I'd rather turn a knob than change a pulley.

Yeah, that's easier, but it's even easier when you have all the boost available at low rpms, and use your right foot to control how much it gets. :lol:

[bluesmobile00]

i am just wondering, I am also new and have never done much to a car until now and never got into it before until after I graduated. But i found a s/c with a switch so it won't run all the time,

[Spilner521]

Yeah, that's easier, but it's even easier when you have all the boost available at low rpms, and use your right foot to control how much it gets. :lol:
I'm at full boost between 2500-3000rpm. How much sooner do you need it?

[[ion] C2]

i am just wondering, I am also new and have never done much to a car until now and never got into it before until after I graduated. But i found a s/c with a switch so it won't run all the time
FAIL. The only thing remotely close to what you speak of are those retarded "electric superchargers" that DON'T DO SHIT.

[Kilroy]

C2;348509']FAIL. The only thing remotely close to what you speak of are those retarded "electric superchargers" that DON'T DO SHIT.

What if you had an airconditioner type clutch on the supercharger? I've always wondered if something like that would work??

[Spilner521]

What if you had an airconditioner type clutch on the supercharger? I've always wondered if something like that would work??
What's the point of having a clutch on a supercharger pulley? At part throttle, air is routed through the bypass valve so the supercharger doesn't make boost all the time, which is a pretty simple way to add power yet retain fuel economy. Why complicate things more with a clutch?

[b-spot]

Yeah, that's easier, but it's even easier when you have all the boost available at low rpms, and use your right foot to control how much it gets. :lol:


Misconception. Turbo cars have way better low end than supercharged cars, just a little bit of lag when you hit the throttle in some cases.

Going back to the original question, sequential Turbos are the most "driveable" setup with more potential power than supercharging (which is also very "driveable"). Programming is complex and so is the build, so way to expensive and not practicle for something not from the factory.

I'd go Turbo for sure. More power potential, better fuel economy, more tuning options.

As for gas, going from 87 to 91 is like $3 or $4 a tank. No big deal.

I have to run 94 unless I turn my car off to drop it down to the 91 program.

I was out skiing this weekend and they only had 91 out there and I paid $1.38/Litre which is the same as ~$5.70/Gallon.

[BlackJack]

Misconception. Turbo cars have way better low end than supercharged cars, just a little bit of lag when you hit the throttle in some cases.

Going back to the original question, sequential Turbos are the most "driveable" setup with more potential power than supercharging (which is also very "driveable"). Programming is complex and so is the build, so way to expensive and not practicle for something not from the factory.

I'd go Turbo for sure. More power potential, better fuel economy, more tuning options.

As for gas, going from 87 to 91 is like $3 or $4 a tank. No big deal.

I have to run 94 unless I turn my car off to drop it down to the 91 program.

I was out skiing this weekend and they only had 91 out there and I paid $1.38/Litre which is the same as ~$5.70/Gallon.

True, and I don't even start making boost unless I intend to by hammering the throttle, so my tune only delivers the extra fuel when it's needed.

Jeez, $5.70 per gallon....is that in CD or did you convert to US equivalent? either way, sounds like they tear you guys' heads off on gas prices.

[b-spot]

True, and I don't even start making boost unless I intend to by hammering the throttle, so my tune only delivers the extra fuel when it's needed.

Jeez, $5.70 per gallon....is that in CD or did you convert to US equivalent? either way, sounds like they tear you guys' heads off on gas prices.

US and CDN dollars are equivalent right now.

The best part is my city has the most Oil and Gas head offices in Canada, and is probably only beat out by Houston in North America... lol.

[AleroB888]

I'm at full boost between 2500-3000rpm. How much sooner do you need it?

You don't need it. At first. Then you don't want to give it up... it's power, it's addictive. Better to have it and not need it.. :)

But seriously, some overkill is "needed" at this altitude and climate, lower altitudes with the same setup/tune could spell disaster for the stock drivetrain. In fact, it's living on borrowed time right now....

[AleroB888]

Misconception. Turbo cars have way better low end than supercharged cars, just a little bit of lag when you hit the throttle in some cases.

That is way too general a statement. There are different types of superchargers and turbos (configurations).

I would say that turbos, in general, are more complex systems, therefore inherently less reliable, needing more safety override features than Roots or twin screw SC's. Much more attention to detail, and technical knowledge is needed to implement an all-out turbo design that is also street legal.

[BlackJack]

That is way too general a statement. There are different types of superchargers and turbos (configurations).

I would say that turbos, in general, are more complex systems, therefore inherently less reliable, needing more safety override features than Roots or twin screw SC's. Much more attention to detail, and technical knowledge is needed to implement an all-out turbo design that is also street legal.

Not to start an argument or something, but I disagree. You say turbo's are more complex systems. However, how many different methods of boost cooling are available for the popular S/C's? Wasn't there a discussion not too long ago that someone had no choice but to go with alch/meth/water injection because no other method of intercooling was available for their S/C? I think it's the flexibility of the turbochargers that make it desireable.

Not to mention, that almost sounds like saying people who run S/C's are too stupid to figure out a turbo and need the simplicity to get any kind of boost.

I've gotten so comfortable with turbo's and know as much as I need to know to get them to work properly for me, and I'm as dumb as a bag of hammers. What would that say about the S/C crowd?

Anybody wants to prove to me that their S/C setup is better than a turbo, just bring an S/C and come line up with me at the tree and we'll get it on.

This isn't meant to start shit. Well...yeah it is :D

[b-spot]

That is way too general a statement. There are different types of superchargers and turbos (configurations).

I would say that turbos, in general, are more complex systems, therefore inherently less reliable, needing more safety override features than Roots or twin screw SC's. Much more attention to detail, and technical knowledge is needed to implement an all-out turbo design that is also street legal.

This applies to absoulutely every supercharged setup, both positive displacement and dynamic, except for one with it's own CVT. Peak boost relies on revs, where as for turbos they depend on exhaust gas pressure and velocity.

[AleroB888]

Not to start an argument or something, but I disagree. You say turbo's are more complex systems. However, how many different methods of boost cooling are available for the popular S/C's? Wasn't there a discussion not too long ago that someone had no choice but to go with alch/meth/water injection because no other method of intercooling was available for their S/C?

Not sure which setup you mean, but if you mean the Magnuson M62 kit, it was not originally designed for intercooling, or even max performance. Even so, I think a front mounted intercooler could be done with it.

But if designing for more power from a clean slate, you might start with an M90, design large inlet / outlet ports configured to work with a big throttle body and front intercooler. (I had actually decided to do that at one point, but instead I refinanced the house... :lol: .... still might do it...)

I think it's the flexibility of the turbochargers that make it desireable.

That's true, I am not arguing that turbos won't make more power once all the bases are touched.

Not to mention, that almost sounds like saying people who run S/C's are too stupid to figure out a turbo and need the simplicity to get any kind of boost.

Are you saying I'm saying I'm stupid? :lol: I am not a mechanic, and I work slow, I like the simplicity.

I've gotten so comfortable with turbo's and know as much as I need to know to get them to work properly for me, and I'm as dumb as a bag of hammers.

I'm not buying the "dumb as hammers" part, not at all. :)

What would that say about the S/C crowd?

You ought to see me fumble around at the track.

Anybody wants to prove to me that their S/C setup is better than a turbo, just bring an S/C and come line up with me at the tree and we'll get it on.

Talk to me when you have over 200 timeslips on that rig, and it's street legal. :)

kwhauck will be your competition, not me..


But hey, I am on your side, I would like to see SpyhunteR have to change his signature line...

just do it.

[bigdaddyD]

Originally Posted by AleroB888

Anybody wants to prove to me that their S/C setup is better than a turbo, just bring an S/C and come line up with me at the tree and we'll get it on.

This isn't meant to start shit. Well...yeah it is :D


Ok, ill take that challenge!:p

[BlackJack]

Not sure which setup you mean, but if you mean the Magnuson M62 kit, it was not originally designed for intercooling, or even max performance. Even so, I think a front mounted intercooler could be done with it.


Hey, I wanna see you make that FMIC for that M62 happen. A lot of people said I wasn't going to drop in a 4t65, said it wouldn't work right, or else blew it off, but I did it. Anything can be done if you want it bad enough.

[Cliff8928]

C2;348509']FAIL. The only thing remotely close to what you speak of are those retarded "electric superchargers" that DON'T DO SHIT.

Actually some of the factory superchargers on Mercedes and Toyota have electromagnetic clutches on them much like your A/C compressor...

[[ion] C2]

Ridiculous.

[Spilner521]

The turbo vs. supercharger debate could go on for days......so I'll add some more :p

Misconception. Turbo cars have way better low end than supercharged cars, just a little bit of lag when you hit the throttle in some cases.
Very true. Boost pressure only tells you how much positive air pressure there is in the intake system, it doesn't tell you how much air is actually flowing into the engine. While, in some cases, a positive displacement supercharger will make full boost quicker than a turbo, it doesn't actually reach full air flow until the engine hits redline, since the supercharger is belt driven. The turbo, being exhaust driven, will reach full boost and full air flow at the same time. A centrifugal supercharger is more like a big, laggy turbo, but again, doesn't reach full air flow or full boost 'til redline.

You don't need it. At first. Then you don't want to give it up... it's power, it's addictive. Better to have it and not need it.. :)
No thanks. I'll gladly take a split second of lag to catch traction in exchange for instant wheel spin. Besides, if traction wasn't a problem (ie. using drag slicks/radials) it's very easy to brake torque and launch in boost.

I would say that turbos, in general, are more complex systems, therefore inherently less reliable, needing more safety override features than Roots or twin screw SC's. Much more attention to detail, and technical knowledge is needed to implement an all-out turbo design that is also street legal.
A complete turbo system isn't nearly as complicated as people think and, as with any aftermarket performance mod, is a very reliable setup when done right. What exactly are you referring to when you mention "safety override features"? You also mention street legality. If you're using a 50 state legal turbo kit, everything is completely legal. If you're building your own kit, in many states at least, as long as the vehicle retains all its emissions equipment and uses a OBDII compliant catalytic converter, it will be fully street legal.

My car will pass a state inspection any day of the week. The only thing that wouldn't be legal is my exhaust, but that depends on the state laws (In NY it's illegal to have any exhaust that's louder than what came on the car from the factory) yet it still passes inspection. It's just the Police that don't like it :p

[AleroB888]

Originally Posted by b-spot
Misconception. Turbo cars have way better low end than supercharged cars, just a little bit of lag when you hit the throttle in some cases.

Very true. Boost pressure only tells you how much positive air pressure there is in the intake system, it doesn't tell you how much air is actually flowing into the engine......

No thanks. I'll gladly take a split second of lag to catch traction in exchange for instant wheel spin. Besides, if traction wasn't a problem (ie. using drag slicks/radials) it's very easy to brake torque and launch in boost.

Before the turbo reaches its boost threshold, the low end throttle response is exactly the same as stock. So how can it be "way better" than a Roots, which, as you say, responds instantly?

Are you sure you are putting it into boost when you do a power-brake launch? What rpm would you hold it at to do that? I avoid that technique because it can kick in torque limiting by the PCM, which usually does so for good reason. In any event, you would be sitting there heating up the intercooler unless you timed it just right, and that's an added distraction at the line. With a stock drivetrain, I had to learn to ease it off the line, but with practice, you can still get a good reaction time. Of course, if you ease it off too much, you won't get a good 60 ft. time, either, so it is a trade-off.


While, in some cases, a positive displacement supercharger will make full boost quicker than a turbo, it doesn't actually reach full air flow until the engine hits redline, since the supercharger is belt driven. ..... The turbo, being exhaust driven, will reach full boost and full air flow at the same time..............

In both cases, airflow into the engine is greatest at the highest rpm, both can be tuned for good results in the midrange.


Originally Posted by AleroB888
I would say that turbos, in general, are more complex systems, therefore inherently less reliable, needing more safety override features than Roots or twin screw SC's. Much more attention to detail, and technical knowledge is needed to implement an all-out turbo design that is also street legal.

A complete turbo system isn't nearly as complicated as people think and, as with any aftermarket performance mod, is a very reliable setup when done right. What exactly are you referring to when you mention "safety override features"?

Safety device in case the wastegate fails, monitor for oiling system failure ( I was thinking that required an override, but I guess not). My point was, there are a lot more things to "get right."

You also mention street legality. If you're using a 50 state legal turbo kit, everything is completely legal. If you're building your own kit, in many states at least, as long as the vehicle retains all its emissions equipment and uses a OBDII compliant catalytic converter, it will be fully street legal.

I think the rule is, the CAT has to be in it's original location. While inspection stations don't test it, the turbo could delay the time it takes the CAT to reach operating temp., which I believe is one standard for commercial kits.

My car will pass a state inspection any day of the week. The only thing that wouldn't be legal is my exhaust, but that depends on the state laws .....................

Yeah, Ive got a test coming up soon, and that is always cause for anxiety for me.

We can discuss the fine points and research and learn more, but I guess we can agree that we have great cars that apparently are doing what we expected, and more, with the modding... :)

[[ion] C2]

w00t for states that don't have inspections :)

[BlackJack]

If you're using a 50 state legal turbo kit, everything is completely legal. If you're building your own kit, in many states at least, as long as the vehicle retains all its emissions equipment and uses a OBDII compliant catalytic converter, it will be fully street legal.

oops.... I might have a problem there......

[Spilner521]

Before the turbo reaches its boost threshold, the low end throttle response is exactly the same as stock. So how can it be "way better" than a Roots, which, as you say, responds instantly
I agree with you that a roots supercharged engine will have better off boost throttle response than a turbo, since the compressor is after the throttle body. I was referring to the actual low end torque available once in boost.

In both cases, airflow into the engine is greatest at the highest rpm, both can be tuned for good results in the midrange.
The turbo, being spun by exhaust gasses, will reach full boost/airflow (when the compressor wheel is spinning it's fastest) early in the rpms and hold that airflow all the way to redline, controlled by the wastegate.

The supercharger, being spun by the engine via belt and pulley, may put out full boost pressure early on, yet won't reach full air flow (when the impellers air spinning their fastest) until redline.

True, the engine ingests the most amount of air at high rpm, but the turbo will force more air into the engine than the supercharger at low and mid range rpms and produce more power and torque earlier. This is assuming the given supercharger and turbo both have the same maximum air flow.

Are you sure you are putting it into boost when you do a power-brake launch? What rpm would you hold it at to do that? I avoid that technique because it can kick in torque limiting by the PCM, which usually does so for good reason. In any event, you would be sitting there heating up the intercooler unless you timed it just right, and that's an added distraction at the line. With a stock drivetrain, I had to learn to ease it off the line, but with practice, you can still get a good reaction time. Of course, if you ease it off too much, you won't get a good 60 ft. time, either, so it is a trade-off.
Yep I'm sure it's in boost, I know this because my boost gauge tells me :thumb: I'll usually hold it at about 2200rpm, and it's only for a second or two, so there's not all kinds of excess heat building up. I have no way of monitoring it, but I've never noticed any kind of torque limiting while brake torquing, the tires grab and launch the car like a rocket every time.

Safety device in case the wastegate fails, monitor for oiling system failure ( I was thinking that required an override, but I guess not). My point was, there are a lot more things to "get right."
There's no saftey device for a failing wastegate, just get a good quality wastegate from the start and you won't have a problem. The oiling system isn't anything special either. All that's required is tapping into the engine oil to send a feed line to the turbo, and sending a drain line from the turbo to the oil pan. If the oiling system develops a problem, there's other things to worry about besides the turbo, just as in any engine, boosted or not.

I think the rule is, the CAT has to be in it's original location. While inspection stations don't test it, the turbo could delay the time it takes the CAT to reach operating temp., which I believe is one standard for commercial kits.
I think you're right about having to keep the cat in it's original location. This will make the cat light off slower since the turbo will be absorbing most of the heat from the exhaust. If your state doesn't sniff the exhaust as part of emissions testing (like in California) there's no problem.

We can discuss the fine points and research and learn more, but I guess we can agree that we have great cars that apparently are doing what we expected, and more, with the modding... :)
I agree. This isn't mean to be any kind of battle by any means, but more of a friendly debate so everyone can learn more about each system.

[Spilner521]

Edit - double post. Damn slow internet.

[Spilner521]

..........

[BigStribS]

about how long before you guys a milzy are fully ready, i just got a pay raise and a nice fat bonus check, and i need to spend it on something?

Our welder is almost done with the jig setup so we're hoping 2 weeks before the headers are completely finished and ready to start production!

[AleroB888]

Our welder is almost done with the jig setup so we're hoping 2 weeks before the headers are completely finished and ready to start production!

Is it possible to get a set made with the banks separated, individual collectors but unflanged?

[Spilner521]

Is it possible to get a set made with the banks separated, individual collectors but unflanged?
Uh oh....:p

[kwhauck]

I'm at full boost between 2500-3000rpm. How much sooner do you need it?

how about 1800rpm?

[Spilner521]

how about 1800rpm?
Maybe you like it, but I personally see no point. It just causes instant wheel spin. Like I said earlier, I'll take the split second of lag to catch traction any day.

[[ion] C2]

yar spinning off the line is no good

breaking traction on the 1-2 shift puts a smile on my face though

[Spilner521]

C2;350534']breaking traction on the 1-2 shift puts a smile on my face though
...and adds a few tenths to your ET in the process..

[kwhauck]

Maybe you like it, but I personally see no point. It just causes instant wheel spin. Like I said earlier, I'll take the split second of lag to catch traction any day.

I just like it, plus i wanted to stick with a supercharger setup. Traction can be had with full race slicks assuming the axles would hold it.