Turbo vs. Vortech s/c
11-03-2006, 01:10 PM
#41
Registered User
Thread Starter
iTrader: (6)
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Boston
Posts: 1,052
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Unfortunately, I have a 5AT, which makes my vortech even slower. I'm hoping to swap pumpkins with someone soon though 
. I'm not sure if 3.9 is right for me, but I'd like to see how much of a diff there is btwn 3.5 and 3.7. But, like I said, first thing's first...need a 3.5 rear diff housing.
. I'm not sure if 3.9 is right for me, but I'd like to see how much of a diff there is btwn 3.5 and 3.7. But, like I said, first thing's first...need a 3.5 rear diff housing.
11-03-2006, 01:14 PM
#42
you might just try swapping to the 3.5 FD. Some one is trying the 3.9 with the 5AT though, but haven't heard yet how it runs. In theory it'd run similar to a stock 6MT gearing once the gears are multiplied to the final drive - with the disadvantage being there is no 6th gear for sorta half decent highway mileage/top speed. The main problem with the 5AT is the spacing between 3rd and 4th gear being a bit too much
the 5AT is a different animal than the 6MT though and I used to drive one before going manual. I think it's a very nice and fast auto - much more so than your traditional 4 speed auto GM auto
I think in some ways it has an advantage over the 6MT in regards to the vortech - just floor the gas and you're basically instantly in high boost without having to shift things yourself (if you have a valvebody upgrade while driving in D anyway)
the 5AT is a different animal than the 6MT though and I used to drive one before going manual. I think it's a very nice and fast auto - much more so than your traditional 4 speed auto GM auto
I think in some ways it has an advantage over the 6MT in regards to the vortech - just floor the gas and you're basically instantly in high boost without having to shift things yourself (if you have a valvebody upgrade while driving in D anyway)
Last edited by sentry65; 11-03-2006 at 01:19 PM.
11-03-2006, 01:19 PM
#43
Registered User
Thread Starter
iTrader: (6)
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Boston
Posts: 1,052
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by sentry65
you might just try swapping to the 3.5 FD. Some one is trying the 3.9 with the 5AT though, but haven't heard yet how it runs. In theory it'd run similar to a stock 6MT gearing once the gears are multiplied to the final drive - with the disadvantage being there is no 6th gear for sorta half decent highway mileage/top speed. The main problem with the 5AT is the spacing between 3rd and 4th gear being a bit too much
the 5AT is a different animal than the 6MT
I think in some ways it has an advantage over the 6MT in regards to the vortech - just floor the gas and you're basically instantly in high boost without having to shift things yourself
the 5AT is a different animal than the 6MT
I think in some ways it has an advantage over the 6MT in regards to the vortech - just floor the gas and you're basically instantly in high boost without having to shift things yourself
I'm going to swap first and see how I like it.Without a VB (still questionable), the 5AT will NOT shift in Auto mode. It will bounce off the rev limiter every time. Only other option I have is to raise my limiter with a reflash from technosquare. In MM mode, the shifts are very slugish and must be induced my taking the foot off the gas when shifting.
11-03-2006, 01:27 PM
#44
oops sorry, missed your last sentence where you said you were trying the 3.5 FD first
yeah I agree, I didn't think MM was as fast as Drive mode either when I had my auto. Shifts would sometimes feel like they took forever in MM, while other times would be about as fast as Drive mode. I didn't like that inconsistency.
Then again, I can't say the 6MT's gearbox is a shifter's dream either. It's nicer than a lot of other car's, but it almost doesn't feel like it likes to shift fast in certain gears - on my 03 at least.
yeah I agree, I didn't think MM was as fast as Drive mode either when I had my auto. Shifts would sometimes feel like they took forever in MM, while other times would be about as fast as Drive mode. I didn't like that inconsistency.
Then again, I can't say the 6MT's gearbox is a shifter's dream either. It's nicer than a lot of other car's, but it almost doesn't feel like it likes to shift fast in certain gears - on my 03 at least.
11-03-2006, 01:38 PM
#45
Registered User
iTrader: (7)
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Bradenton/Sarasota
Posts: 5,254
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by sentry65
thing is, an exhaust does a lot more for a turbo than a SC because it doesn't just change power, but also how the turbo spools up.
and actually, PSI between a SC and turbo are not compatible. The turbo has a wastegate to maintain a constant psi and the SC doesn't
and actually, PSI between a SC and turbo are not compatible. The turbo has a wastegate to maintain a constant psi and the SC doesn't
you want to compare, you compare them equally, mod for mod, same boost level. The turbo will always make more power per mod and more power per pound of boost, plus it will ALWAYS be easier to get more power out of a turbo.........plus you don't have belt slip issues, rattle issues, etc.
So compare them equally, mod for mod, boost level for boost level. Obviously the turbo and s/c have different spool characteristics......and that's why they're compared the way they are......s/c doesn't make boost down low in the midrange like turbo which doesn't have as much meat in the powerband as turbo does.........the simple fact is, the extra meat makes for a faster car. From a roll, a turbo is definitely going to be quicker, when hp levels are the same, due to the difference in torque.
11-03-2006, 01:51 PM
#46
i'm trying to compare them boost for boost
TN + exhaust + stock wastegate = 8psi = 365whp
vortech + exhaust + 3.12 pulley= 8 psi = 365whp
TN + test pipe + exhaust + stock wastegate = 9 psi @ 390whp
vortech + test pipes + exhaust + 2.87 pulley = 9 psi @ 390 whp
**now we know of course that the midrange torque/power is going to be drastically different between the setups, but the peak hp numbers near redline are usually comparable
the turbo is cheaper to make higher power. But you NEED smaller SC pullies on the SC to make up for the difference in psi since the SC doesn't have a wastegate. Turbos have TONS of excess psi that goes out of the wastegate that it has available to it when you make it easier for the air to escape by adding exhaust mods. With the SC, you have to increase that headroom yourself - part of the reason boost spikes do not exist on a SC - the excess boost isn't available to accidently go into the engine because the wastegate got stuck shut or whatever. The SC essentailly has the boost capped off by the pulley or size blower that you run
If you had a theoretical restrictive half inch exhaust, the turbo would still make 8 psi and vent a whole lot more air out the wastegate while having lower hp
The SC has no wastegate and instead would generate like 20 psi @ around the same low hp # as the turbo
what I don't like about any high whp turbo setup on any car, is sooner or later, you see the shape of the torque become extremely weird looking. It tends to hold low end power to stock or lower than stock levels, then shoots up to huge spikey peak around the mid rpms, then starts falling fast after that towards redline.
Centrifugals raise the entire rpm band, though it's mostly the upper region. It moves the torque up instead of "scaling" it up. Think of it as taking the extra midrange torque away from what turbos make and adding it to the low end. It's more gradual and not as drastic feeling as the turbo's setup
Still though, shoving 1 psi into the engine at 1000 rpms DOES make the engine respond at that low rpm. Actually because the rpms are so low, having 1 full psi of boost at all will fill up the entire piston chamber and even though low boost numbers at low rpms might not seem like a big deal, it'll make a bigger difference adding 1 psi at 1000 rpms than adding 1psi at 7000 rpms where the engine isn't as efficient and hardly has time to shove 1psi of air into the cylinder chambers. This is EXACTLY why big liter cars jump off the line so much more at low rpms than smaller displacement engines and also why their low end torque starts HUGE from the start
turbos and SC's are just different. Few people try to make a high whp SC setup on the Z because going turbo is simply easier and cheaper to do and also partly cause everyone else is doing it - turbos have more bling factor these days than SC's. And yeah turbos will ALWAYS be easier to make more power with on the same size engine, and will always be easier to rev to higher rpms because of fewer pullies and shorter belt. A turbo engine that can rev to 8000 rpms is awesome, but only if the power curve is shaped in a way to make it worthwhile.
This is why I'm planning on spending the extra money I saved by going with the vortech instead of a TT on the GTM 4.26 stroker kit instead of a normal built engine (which because of the bigger displacement will actually lower boost pressure, while shooting the entire powerband up 20-21% higher) and then change the stock vortech blower to the T-trim
Then the "battle" of my car vs the turbo Z's will later continue with
3.5L 9.0:1 CR TT @ 15 (edited) psi @7000-8000 rpms, with 3.358 FD = 550whp / 570 tq
vs
4.26L 9.5:1 CR T-trim vortech @ 14 psi @ 7000 rpms, with 3.917 FD = 550whp / 480tq
480tq might actually be manageable on street legal tires, but 570 will probably lose traction - so then you end up taking your foot off the gas to modulate the throttle and again it's like why have huge tq if you can't even use it?
now the TT people that want 700+whp and want to get the GTM stroker kit, well that's beyond what I'd ever want, but I say go for it. Just make sure you have slicks...
TN + exhaust + stock wastegate = 8psi = 365whp
vortech + exhaust + 3.12 pulley= 8 psi = 365whp
TN + test pipe + exhaust + stock wastegate = 9 psi @ 390whp
vortech + test pipes + exhaust + 2.87 pulley = 9 psi @ 390 whp
**now we know of course that the midrange torque/power is going to be drastically different between the setups, but the peak hp numbers near redline are usually comparable
the turbo is cheaper to make higher power. But you NEED smaller SC pullies on the SC to make up for the difference in psi since the SC doesn't have a wastegate. Turbos have TONS of excess psi that goes out of the wastegate that it has available to it when you make it easier for the air to escape by adding exhaust mods. With the SC, you have to increase that headroom yourself - part of the reason boost spikes do not exist on a SC - the excess boost isn't available to accidently go into the engine because the wastegate got stuck shut or whatever. The SC essentailly has the boost capped off by the pulley or size blower that you run
If you had a theoretical restrictive half inch exhaust, the turbo would still make 8 psi and vent a whole lot more air out the wastegate while having lower hp
The SC has no wastegate and instead would generate like 20 psi @ around the same low hp # as the turbo
what I don't like about any high whp turbo setup on any car, is sooner or later, you see the shape of the torque become extremely weird looking. It tends to hold low end power to stock or lower than stock levels, then shoots up to huge spikey peak around the mid rpms, then starts falling fast after that towards redline.
Centrifugals raise the entire rpm band, though it's mostly the upper region. It moves the torque up instead of "scaling" it up. Think of it as taking the extra midrange torque away from what turbos make and adding it to the low end. It's more gradual and not as drastic feeling as the turbo's setup
Still though, shoving 1 psi into the engine at 1000 rpms DOES make the engine respond at that low rpm. Actually because the rpms are so low, having 1 full psi of boost at all will fill up the entire piston chamber and even though low boost numbers at low rpms might not seem like a big deal, it'll make a bigger difference adding 1 psi at 1000 rpms than adding 1psi at 7000 rpms where the engine isn't as efficient and hardly has time to shove 1psi of air into the cylinder chambers. This is EXACTLY why big liter cars jump off the line so much more at low rpms than smaller displacement engines and also why their low end torque starts HUGE from the start
turbos and SC's are just different. Few people try to make a high whp SC setup on the Z because going turbo is simply easier and cheaper to do and also partly cause everyone else is doing it - turbos have more bling factor these days than SC's. And yeah turbos will ALWAYS be easier to make more power with on the same size engine, and will always be easier to rev to higher rpms because of fewer pullies and shorter belt. A turbo engine that can rev to 8000 rpms is awesome, but only if the power curve is shaped in a way to make it worthwhile.
This is why I'm planning on spending the extra money I saved by going with the vortech instead of a TT on the GTM 4.26 stroker kit instead of a normal built engine (which because of the bigger displacement will actually lower boost pressure, while shooting the entire powerband up 20-21% higher) and then change the stock vortech blower to the T-trim
Then the "battle" of my car vs the turbo Z's will later continue with
3.5L 9.0:1 CR TT @ 15 (edited) psi @7000-8000 rpms, with 3.358 FD = 550whp / 570 tq
vs
4.26L 9.5:1 CR T-trim vortech @ 14 psi @ 7000 rpms, with 3.917 FD = 550whp / 480tq
480tq might actually be manageable on street legal tires, but 570 will probably lose traction - so then you end up taking your foot off the gas to modulate the throttle and again it's like why have huge tq if you can't even use it?
now the TT people that want 700+whp and want to get the GTM stroker kit, well that's beyond what I'd ever want, but I say go for it. Just make sure you have slicks...
Last edited by sentry65; 11-15-2006 at 12:25 PM.
11-03-2006, 02:10 PM
#47
Registered User
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: ABQNM
Posts: 108
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Good thread. I'm gonna have to give the nod to sentry this time for making the better argument.
Just when ya think you're starting to lean more towards the turbo side of the fence, sentry's vortech arguments keep pullin ya back. DAMNIT...it's like a seesaw.
Just when ya think you're starting to lean more towards the turbo side of the fence, sentry's vortech arguments keep pullin ya back. DAMNIT...it's like a seesaw.
11-03-2006, 02:24 PM
#48
well, honestly I went with the vortech for several reasons, but if I was starting over and was BONE STOCK, I might be tempted to just get a TT and be done with it instead of trying to "engineer" my own setup and train of thought
it isn't an easy decision at all and 400whp ST/TT or 440whp vortech/ATI is plenty for 95% of people - seriously.
as far as SC maintenance, well you tighten the belt when you change your oil and then replace the belt a little sooner than normal. As far as belts slipping, there's options out there just few people have tried them. Some people are pioneering things right now and there's a lot of learning happening, but it's slow because only a handful of people are really trying to push the vortech setups
it isn't an easy decision at all and 400whp ST/TT or 440whp vortech/ATI is plenty for 95% of people - seriously.
as far as SC maintenance, well you tighten the belt when you change your oil and then replace the belt a little sooner than normal. As far as belts slipping, there's options out there just few people have tried them. Some people are pioneering things right now and there's a lot of learning happening, but it's slow because only a handful of people are really trying to push the vortech setups
Last edited by sentry65; 11-03-2006 at 02:52 PM.
11-03-2006, 02:59 PM
#50
Well it won't be very soon. Maybe in a couple years or so. For something that big, I want to see other people's issues first. I'm just outlining what my current future plans are and what I think is a viable option for vortech owners who want a lot more power. It's one of the mods that makes total sense to me as it compliments vortech setups perfectly
i need to save up for the whole thing, which is hard as my wife can't work due to medical reasons and we're trying to pay off some debt as is. So until I actually am ready to afford it, I'm all talk for now
but I've wanted to stroke this engine since back when I was NA so I'm pretty sure I'll go this route. I had a lot of issues with the AEBS kit and apparently it had issues too, but the GTM one looks absolutely perfect to me. Otherwise I was strongly considering a 3.8 liter bore before the GTM kit was announced
I'm going to continue to do other smaller things though as I intend to get some miles out of my current engine. Probably going to get an Fcon sometime in preparation for that engine. I think it'll have to have a ferrea valvetrain if I'm going to be able to rev it to 7000 being stroked and all
I'd also like to see some dynos, but I'm pretty sure it'll do exactly what all stroker kits do - add more power across the whole powerband.
i need to save up for the whole thing, which is hard as my wife can't work due to medical reasons and we're trying to pay off some debt as is. So until I actually am ready to afford it, I'm all talk for now
but I've wanted to stroke this engine since back when I was NA so I'm pretty sure I'll go this route. I had a lot of issues with the AEBS kit and apparently it had issues too, but the GTM one looks absolutely perfect to me. Otherwise I was strongly considering a 3.8 liter bore before the GTM kit was announcedI'm going to continue to do other smaller things though as I intend to get some miles out of my current engine. Probably going to get an Fcon sometime in preparation for that engine. I think it'll have to have a ferrea valvetrain if I'm going to be able to rev it to 7000 being stroked and all
I'd also like to see some dynos, but I'm pretty sure it'll do exactly what all stroker kits do - add more power across the whole powerband.
Last edited by sentry65; 11-03-2006 at 03:21 PM.
11-03-2006, 03:29 PM
#52
Originally Posted by sentry65
IMO the vortech will have about equal top end as a turbo at the same psi
Originally Posted by sentry65
and actually, PSI between a SC and turbo are not compatible.
11-03-2006, 03:32 PM
#53
Registered User
iTrader: (3)
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: boston area, ma
Posts: 780
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by chimmike
the turbo car will always have more torque which will make it quicker.
yea at the highest rpm. but superchargers are instant increase in hp and tq with the touch of your throttle.
11-03-2006, 03:33 PM
#55
Originally Posted by Alberto
So which one isit? I love how you change your tune when people speak up...
well they're not truely compatible when you start changing things around like exhaust because the turbo wastegate compensates and the SC doesn't. If you DO compensate the SC's lower boost with changing the pulley, to bring your psi back up, then they're even.
if you put a stock turbo kit on a Z that makes 8 psi and vs stock vortech that makes 8 psi, yeah roughly same peak whp towards redline
believe it or not, both my statements are true though I should have added to the end of the second statement to clarify
and actually, PSI between a SC and turbo are not compatible when you start making adjustments to breathing
Last edited by sentry65; 11-03-2006 at 03:37 PM.
11-03-2006, 03:35 PM
#56
Originally Posted by nicholasm617
yea at the highest rpm. but superchargers are instant increase in hp and tq with the touch of your throttle.
the centrifugals do make some instant boost off idle, but it isn't much, like maybe 1 psi at best - kinda depends on what your idle is. Mine is 1100 rpms and my car does leap out pretty good
Originally Posted by Oleg
If only the centrifugals did not make the engine sound like it's broken...
(a drive in your fun car should be fun from every aspect)
(a drive in your fun car should be fun from every aspect)
they do make more noise, but honestly most of the videos of the vortech at idle on the net and this site sound horrible. My car at least doesn't seem near that bad - maybe it's something with how the microphones are picking up the sound, especially when the camera gets like 1 foot away from the blower pointing right at it. Or maybe it's my 1100 rpm idle...
my clutch makes about the same amount of noise as my vortech
Last edited by sentry65; 11-03-2006 at 03:48 PM.
11-03-2006, 03:42 PM
#57
Originally Posted by sentry65
i'm trying to compare them boost for boost
TN + exhaust + stock wastegate = 8psi = 365whp
vortech + exhaust + 3.12 pulley= 8 psi = 365whp
TN + test pipe + exhaust + stock wastegate = 9 psi @ 390whp
vortech + test pipes + exhaust + 2.87 pulley = 9 psi @ 390 whp
Then the "battle" of my car vs the turbo Z's will later continue with
3.5L 9.0:1 CR TT @ 18psi @7000-8000 rpms, with 3.358 FD = 550whp / 570 tq
vs
4.26L 9.5:1 CR T-trim vortech @ 14 psi @ 7000 rpms, with 3.917 FD = 550whp / 480tq
now the TT people that want 700+whp and want to get the GTM stroker kit, well that's beyond what I'd ever want, but I say go for it. Just make sure you have slicks...
TN + exhaust + stock wastegate = 8psi = 365whp
vortech + exhaust + 3.12 pulley= 8 psi = 365whp
TN + test pipe + exhaust + stock wastegate = 9 psi @ 390whp
vortech + test pipes + exhaust + 2.87 pulley = 9 psi @ 390 whp
Then the "battle" of my car vs the turbo Z's will later continue with
3.5L 9.0:1 CR TT @ 18psi @7000-8000 rpms, with 3.358 FD = 550whp / 570 tq
vs
4.26L 9.5:1 CR T-trim vortech @ 14 psi @ 7000 rpms, with 3.917 FD = 550whp / 480tq
now the TT people that want 700+whp and want to get the GTM stroker kit, well that's beyond what I'd ever want, but I say go for it. Just make sure you have slicks...
11-03-2006, 03:55 PM
#58
A turbo will be hands down more fun to drive and faster assuming all things are equal including the driver's ability to effeciently use each type of FI's power band.
While wheel spin is more common on turbo cars, if the driver knows how to handle the power so that they can limit wheel spin you have one fast car.
A SC will be more predictable and will be more likely to have less power variance due to temperature differences. The only reason I state this is because a turbo car will seem to lose more midrange power on hot days due to the simple fact that as stated it produces more midrange than an SC.
Personally, if you are not planning to make your own SC kit, I would go with the Vortech just based on the feed back from people on the forum. But a turbo is the way to go in my opinion if you have the money and the time to do everything correctly.
While wheel spin is more common on turbo cars, if the driver knows how to handle the power so that they can limit wheel spin you have one fast car.
A SC will be more predictable and will be more likely to have less power variance due to temperature differences. The only reason I state this is because a turbo car will seem to lose more midrange power on hot days due to the simple fact that as stated it produces more midrange than an SC.
Personally, if you are not planning to make your own SC kit, I would go with the Vortech just based on the feed back from people on the forum. But a turbo is the way to go in my opinion if you have the money and the time to do everything correctly.
11-03-2006, 04:02 PM
#59
Originally Posted by Alberto
Where are you getting these numbers from? I have yet to see a 4.2L S/C set-up your calulations dont mean squat. And FWIW-18psi on most TT kits tuned by anything other than a monkey is more than 550whp, I do 30whp more at 3psi less-on pump gas. Also 9psi for a TN kit? Thats average while you compare it to a good/better Vortech tune. You may fool the newbs into believing your arguements but not me. Most Turbo's at 9psi are 400whp+...I dont know you push the S/C's so much, clearly the choice for power is a turbo.
as far as 18psi making 580 - ok whatever, 18psi is 580whp then.
Originally Posted by Alberto
Yet you had to spend money on bolt-ons, 3.9FD to help your down low acceleration make up for its lackluster power, cams and a good tune (thousands in parts and labor), all could be achieved on a turbo kit with an exhaust and a tune. So in the end you have a car with less TQ, weaker midrange/powerband, and "equal" peak hp figures. If that makes you happy good, but you preach like slapping on a Vortech + 2.87 pulley = turbo performance and it doesnt.
on the other hand you seem to act a lot like a turbo and peak midrange torque = the only way to go fast.
you should be pretty smug then that your car would be mind blowing faster then mine shouldn't you?
As stated in many places, going fast in a straight line isn't what I'm building my car for
Last edited by sentry65; 11-03-2006 at 04:06 PM.
11-03-2006, 04:05 PM
#60
Originally Posted by sentry65
no, that means the car is easier to launch consistently with normal street tires, not slicks or drag radials. It doesn't mean it'll launch harder, not sure why you made that conclusion because we all know a turbo with slicks will always launch like a bat out of hell - you of all people should know right? Just saying that you can be on the street with normal tires and floor it in first gear, and go. No wheel spin, no drama
Originally Posted by sentry65
well I meant the top end is close enough to a turbo's top end to be comparable, but if you have a consistent 8psi turbo that reaches 8psi and holds it, vs the stock vortech that ramps up to 8 psi, it's obvious the constant 8 psi turbo is going to generate a lot more power in the midrange. I said turbos would probably be .5 sec or less - meaning probably less.
Shouldn't you of all people know if a turbo Z with slicks goes to the strip and does a 11.9 and then a "stock" vortech on street tires does a 12.5 that they're comparable, but the edge does go to the turbo probably cause slicks will do to help the turbo car than they will to help the vortech car
Shouldn't you of all people know if a turbo Z with slicks goes to the strip and does a 11.9 and then a "stock" vortech on street tires does a 12.5 that they're comparable, but the edge does go to the turbo probably cause slicks will do to help the turbo car than they will to help the vortech car
I dont care if you take a Vortech with cams, FD AND slicks, the norm for turbo guys as of recently is mid 12's on street tires with many 12.3 or lower, while that is a spectacular time for the Vortech-again no comparison, you wanna look at "powerbands" show me 1 S/C car trapping over 113-114mph with bolt-ons 9psi or less and a tune<---norm for turbo's
so what would you say does then? power? same thing
ok well under your definition of what stock is, then I was wrong
I was meaning stock as in you take a stock vortech kit added to some typical things like exhaust, cats and plenum, and then tune the thing. I wasn't considering tuning optional. I think everyone should get their FI car to a shop to tune - not just for power, but to double check A/F etc
I'd hate to see a "stock" turbo run with no tune and no exhaust anything. Those setups usually run high 12's as well right?
I was meaning stock as in you take a stock vortech kit added to some typical things like exhaust, cats and plenum, and then tune the thing. I wasn't considering tuning optional. I think everyone should get their FI car to a shop to tune - not just for power, but to double check A/F etc
I'd hate to see a "stock" turbo run with no tune and no exhaust anything. Those setups usually run high 12's as well right?
btw, does everyone who has a FI Z post on these boards? Does everyone who's a track junkie come home and post times for Alberto to see? Some people just go to the strip, do some runs and some of them might even be pretty decent like mid 12's. Not everyone feels the need to rush back to My350Z.com and post up scanned time slips to prove to the world that they have some big ***** or something
I don't see very many people at all that have a bone stock car, with a bone stock FI kit, bone stock tune and NOTHING else. Everyone usually has an exhaust and plenum or something else added in the mix. Everyone usually tries adding some cheap bolt on NA parts first before they decide they need to step up into FI and I thought most people usually bothered to take their car to the dyno to get tuned since base FI tunes were not tuned with the assumption people would have breathing mods already
You mean the crazy theory that slicks would make their car faster in the 1/4 mile?
I guess the vortech guys don't want to be 1/4 mile gods like you alberto. I suppose one theory might be want to actually be out driving their car instead of busting up their transmission or axels and other things?
I guess the vortech guys don't want to be 1/4 mile gods like you alberto. I suppose one theory might be want to actually be out driving their car instead of busting up their transmission or axels and other things?
make up for your lack of power (midrange)
you're right, my car must be real slow 
the base TN kit probably is the god of all things performance
360whp TN OwNZ sentry65
btw, where did I bring my car vs a base TN into this discussion?
I might believe that a base 360whp TN Z might feel faster than my car, cause that's one of the things turbos do - make you feel faster than you actually are
the base TN kit probably is the god of all things performance
360whp TN OwNZ sentry65
btw, where did I bring my car vs a base TN into this discussion?
I might believe that a base 360whp TN Z might feel faster than my car, cause that's one of the things turbos do - make you feel faster than you actually are
Yeah good test of performance... You talk up your awersome low end/top end Vortech and have no proof of its performance otherthan a dyno. Id have more respect for you if you talked out of experience rather than theory.