We have a winner. That is bar far the most pics posted at one time by a poster in the history of My350Z.com, Congrats!

 

Holy Fast and Furious.

 

interesting, i didnt know the stillen s/c is a roots. i've only seen that pic of it w/ the chopped up hood. i already have traction probs in 1st and 2nd as it is. i'm sticking with the turbo route 'cause thats what i've worked with the most. who cares if you've got oil lines to do, just do it right the first time and no worries. plus i dont know if the stillen s/c will have some sort of aftercooler or something. i just know the z front end was DESIGNED for an fmic

also u cant build pressure w/ a turbo setup in neutral or the clutch disengaged....there needs to be load on the engine

 

wicked4u2c,

that venum civic looks familiar....were u ever at importbuilders on a dyno day?

 

also you must realize a SC uses up 20 % plus of the power it creates just to turn the compressor, and on a car like the Z that has good tourque the little bit of lag on the turbo will only help ease the launch, not to mention some low boost SC's actually lose power up till a crossover point in the RPM where the increased boost overcomes the increased drag. There is no comparison in performance between a SC and a Turbo(turbos were outlawed in top fuel for a reason) a turbo is much better system, and can work great on a higher compression engine if its tuned correctly, on the Z expect 500 plus hp from a twin turbo and dont worry about lag worry about keeping your tires from melting off the rims

 

someone said "sharing parts?" Doesnt the x-terra have a SC? Does it have a VQ?

 

Yes, I was at Importbuilders.. Jeff is a good friend of mine. What car were you driving?

 

here here!

Finally, a person that isn't caught in all the sc hype.

 

Just to add my quick 2 cents worth without reading the entire thread in detail...

I've had a SC and turbo on my current car at different times. Both were good but if I had to do it again I'd go with turbo.

1. Both were good to drive. On the same boost the SC had more torque (too much if that's possible) but the turbo more power.
2. Neither had an advantage over the other when it came to maintenance, neither required anything the stock car wouldn't.
3. The belt whine from the SC was annoying after a while and that was with a non toothed belt.
4. Both come onto boost equally with no noticeable lag. Turbo lag is a thing of the past or an incorrectly sized turbo.

IMO a properly setup turbo is a better solution but in the end do what you want. It's that simple.

 

If you look at the power curve with the Turbo, the S2000 has much more torque down low than the S2000 with the centrifugal supercharger, therefore, the S2000 can launch easier since it only needs to rev to about 4500 RPMs to launch the car. With the centrifugal supercharger, the S2000 still has to rev to high RPMs in order to get a good launch. If you've seen the torque cruve for a stock S2000, the stock curve and supercharger curver are pretty similar. The centrifugal SC for the S2000 doesn't seem to really make torque until VTEC hits.

 

waddup armando..this is Jon...i met you up at palmdale a while ago when you still had the civic, i came with mike kye anyways just figured it was your car and i heard from mike you got a new z and sold your civic...well good luck

peace

 

Hey, yeah that was a long time ago! How's everything going?

 

Turbo is a much better system? Well, define what do you wan for a system. Turbo is more effective, make more power. Thus, if a car race most of its time at straight line, turbo is better. Like drag race or highway chase. But turbo lag does exist, even with small ball bearing turbo. If you can't notice its existence, you don't know how to drive yet. Sorry to say that. Just go observe auto-X community, turbo is never a favor choice.
And I don't think 500hp is realistic target for a bolt on turbo or s/c. Unless some internal mods to lower compression are done

 

on a already powerfull engine like the z's lag will not matter. a rsx-s ca put down 300 whp from a bolt on kit, its stock is 165 whp. the Z will easily see 500 crank hp, go look at what other cars are gaining from a turbo kit i think you will be shocked. And as for compression go read corky Bell's maximum boost. And if your SC setup made more tourque than a turbo at the same boost there is something wrong(the sc is way less efficient) and hp is just a calculation of tourque so if the sc had more tourque it as well had more power. tourque x RPM/ 5250=hp. so my guess is your turbo setup was using too large of a turbo or had some other problems.

 

I have to disagree with you, again I had a supercharger and a Turbocharger. and I can say I was fully spooled at 3,500RPM. Now, this is a Civic SI with redline at 8K. My Jackson Racing Supercharger was at full boost at 2,500 RPM that is only a 1K difference which is not even noticiable. I do go to a couple Auto-X and do see quite a few turbo peeps here... Why don't you think 500hp is a realistic targer with stock internals? Compression has the least to do with target numbers as opposed to strength of the internals and properly tuned motor. I have seen many high compression engines reach outstanding numbers. The reason why people go with lower compression is because it gives you that safety for less mistakes when tuning and less prone to detonation. But I perfectly tuned motor shouldn't worry about such things. Again, if the stock internal can handle (strength wise) than it should be a problem.. Take for example the Supra Motor 2JZ. A lot have boosted to 900Whp on stock internals, which is why the Supra is a very strong ENGINE! from stock 300hp to 900 is a big difference!

 

I've only had one turbo car, a 91 MR2, the lag was a problem. plus I had to sit and let it cool down after a spirited drive. Max torque came at 3200rpm, but you began to feel it at 2000 rpm. My C.R. was 8.8:1 and the Z is 10.3:1. When Nissan comes out with either, I will consider their version. I have no faith in aftermarket FI at this time, especially at the cost that has been mentioned. I'll go with NA mods, if any, until I have a factory warranty.

 

plus I had to sit and let it cool down after a spirited drive.

That's why they invented turbo timers

 

If the turbo system is setup right with the right housing size for minimal lag, the car will be fine for AutoX or Road Racing. My friend's AutoXs and Tracks his 500HP RX7 all the time. The turbo lag is virtually non existant and it kills almost everything on the AutoX course, as well as the track. He's got a T04E, which gives a pretty damn linear power curve.

Anyways, also take a look at the Champ S4 that races in the GT series. It's got twin KO4 turbos and the car's doing awesome.

Also, if you forgot, CART cars use turbos....Formula one cars used to use turbos also.

 

I'm not disagreeing with your or anything, but the Supra Turbo motor was also originally developed as a Diesel motor. That's why it's so strong.

 

Exactly... With strong internals, and a properly tuned engine I see no problem making high horsepower! Nissan is excellent for making strong "internally" motors. I see no problem in seeing the Z make 500whp on stock internals!