joeshow750

zland,
I prefer a single turbo, but out of the SC's I'd go with the centrifugal type. The roots style SC build boost very early in the rpm's...almost instantaneous. I like the centrifugal because it doesn't build boost right away, it needs more rpm's. This way I won't always be putting boost into a high CR engine and taking the unecessary detonation risk, only want the boost when I'm hammering.

I prefer the air-to-air type intercooler, unless they can make a much more effecient heat exchanger. Air-to-air is simpler. The best setup IMO is air-to-air with a mister/sprayer placed on the intake. This really helps cool down the air. In AZ, in can get up to 115 degrees, so I plan on installing one of these if I go SC. With a turbo it's nice to be able to just turn down the boost when you see the EGT's getting too high...don't have that luxury with an SC.

zland

joeshow750

Hmm, it sounds like you like the Procharger-ATI set up then for a SC? You seem to be knowledgeable and non biased on the TT vs SC debate. Can you specify specifically why you prefer the TT set up vs SC set up on the VQ motor without changing internals?

thanks, Jeff

BriGuyMax

iTrader: (4)

I'm just speculating here, but I assume than joe likes Turbo set-ups better because of their flexibility (being able to raise and lower boost with the touch of a button) and their lack of parasitic loss.

BTW - I wouldn't worry about changing internals on a VQ motor anytime soon....you'll run into MAJOR traction problems on the street with a boosted VQ WELL before you pop the stock motor...

D'oh

On their website, ATI recommends an air-air intercooler for land based vehicles because of the simplicity, and an air-water intercooler for boats, because they typically have the engine in the back where it's more difficult to find good airflow and because they have access to a very large amount of cool water.

-D'oh!

zoasis

I was at Kansas City International Raceway last night. A guy working the track said the test Z was at the track Sunday running 7 lbs of boost. He said he thought the Procharger Z ran low 13's with stock tires. Once they get everything tuned, I would hope for low 12's.

I'm not sure how accurate the above is, thats hust what the guy working the track told me.

I ran 14.1 best at 98 with a 2.19 60' and 5.68 RT so it looks like the supercharger already has one second on me, who knows if the guy driving had a clue how to launch either, maybe he could have easily broke into the 12's.

joeshow750

Yeah, I like the ATI setup, with the centrifugal and air-to-air, but BriGuyMax hit on a couple main reasons for going turbo; flexibility/tuneability, parasitic loss. Turbos do have some degree of loss due to the extra amount of backpressure/restriction in the exhaust, but not nearly as much as an SC. More opinionated reasons include; guilty of loving the sound of a BOV, knowing more about TC applications than SC applications.

On the other side SC's are easier to install (even though the intercooler will complicate things, but it's definitely worth it)...still, less parts, better accessibility

As far as reliability (I'm talking about the SC and TC themselves not the engine installed on...realibity of the engine with the kit installed will be determined by the R&D of the manufacturer as a baseline and personal tuning later on, ie., make a new friend in an EGT), I don't see a centrifugal SC having much of an advantage over a turbo-timed TC (many believe that all SC's are more reliable). Although, if the turbo does happen to "break" in some way it will be more of a pain to fix than the easily accessible SC. Both compressors work the same, so they will be spinning at high rpm's which can cause stress on the bearings especially when not properly cooled. Some manifolds that come with TC kits are crappy and crack, but I'm thinking that we'll be getting a quality kit, so that's not really an issue.

BTW I should mention that I'd want a single turbo, rather than a TT. I'm happy with my low end grunt the way it is.

wileecoyte

THat's a pretty good point that I've been thining about. Initially I thought I wanted a roots type for the instant power from very low revs. BUT, people with just a few bolt ons are having problems with traction, so adding another 100 HP down low might not be the best idea.

B/c a centrifgual builds power progressively you don't get the full on hit until higher up in the revs where you'll be able to put the power down. Also when tooling around at low revs you won't be forcing in as much air and it will be easier on your engine. Plus you have an intercooler to cool down the charge somewhat, something that is not easy to do on a roots type. You have to use the air-water exchangers and it gets very complicated. So by cooling the air you get even more power at the top than a roots type would give.

McDan

Here in KC, huh? That's kick ***! Maybe they'll bring it out tonight, I plan on going up there and making a few runs.

Dan

Boomer

Centrifugal, huh? I hadn't thought about the traction problem, but it makes sense. My 5AT will activate the TCS on a dusty road twice already from rest and full throttle on full auto, so traction will be a big problem. When it first happened, I thought it was the rev limiter, but not on full auto, and at 6000rpm! An S/C that builds power early will just melt the stock tires.

How can you ensure it will build power high in the rev range? What is used to control the boost at high revs, and how high do you go, 45-4800 to 62-6600rpm?

zmeister03

You guys know that most of procharger SCs for the 6cyl including inter cooler are running about $3150.
Take a look at the unit for the 3.8 cyl mustang for example.
It supports 5 and 7lbs of boost.
There is really no reason why the price for the Z should jump up to 4K except for over anxious customers.

msink

But this kit is being made for a 3rd party, who can charge what ever they think we will pay.

Mark

msink

Oh my bad.. that was the Alpine kit that was for 3rd party, not ATI.

Mark

joeshow750

Centrifugal type SC's build a certain amount of boost at a certain rpm. The SC's pulley and a set of gears are what spin the impeller, the faster the pulley spins, the faster the impeller spins and more boost/psi is made. If the SC is sized correctly it will continue to make power to the redline...if undersized, it will run out of steam early and power will taper off, though it may continue to make more boost, the heat of the air will cause expansion and offset the gain of the boost.

zoasis

Pro-Charger is designing the Kit, here is Olathe, KS from what I understand.

91na

Where abouts in Blue Springs do you live zoasis? Do you own a Z? I have only seen two around here. A PPW and the beautiful Blue.

Soon2BMaxed

is this Shaun? 2.19 60? i could have sworn you told me 1.9 i didn't know you were on here?


i cant believe theres this many people from hole in the wall Blue Springs MO in one thread


Trevor

zoasis

Just north of I-70. Yes, I have a Z. Go by Oasis Tan just behind 54th St Bar and Grill and you'll see my redline Z with 19" I-Forged Aero's that says "Zoasis" on the plate if I'm there.

zoasis

Sorry, not shaun

that is weird, this many guys from BS.

I wish 1.9, I don't think its possible with the 19" I-Forged Aero's.

Everyone needs to run in the SCCA autocross at Royals Stadium on May 18th, I'll be there for sure, hopefully with JIC coilovers and some smaller wheels and maybe a big brake package, intake and an exhaust :-)

Boomer

So its a guessing/testing game to determine the size of the pulley that drives the impeller to coincide with the Z's power curve? The figure I saw was the Z makes 200ft lbs of torque at 1200rpm and so on to a peak of 274 at 4800rpm. When do you want it to start spooling up to match or exceed the torque peak and coincide with the HP peak or redline?

Shouldn't it be idling until around 36-4000 rpm? Also, there's a big dropoff of HP after 6200rpm when the engine sounds very labored. Is 400 more rpm worth using the S/C to reach, since the engine vibration increases a lot until 6600?

joeshow750

I would imagine they have a pretty good idea from the start what would be a good impeller and housing size to match with a pulley, with their experience and all, but turbos/Centrifugal SC's are rated on how much HP they can support. So I'd imagine they pick a target hp based on the compression ratio and various other engine factors then choose a SC that can support it. Then "guess/test" their way to the proper pulley size or gear ratios.
I'm not too concerned with keeping the original hp tq curves, that's more of roots/rotor/positive displacement type thing... since they build boost early and maintain it, they will probably follow your original hp tq curves more closely. This will build boost more like a turbo. With detonation being such a big concern with our high CR engine, I would want the SC to run at an effecient level to the redline. This way it will pull to the redline and not run out of steam, so it won't just be blowing hot air into the cylinders and causing detonation (boost doesn't cause detonation, heat does). The adiabatic effeciency of centrifugal type SC is even better than a turbo (due to the fact that a turbo shares a commom shaft with the compressor side, so heat tranfer from the exhaust is a factor). I'd rather have the heat of more highly, and effeciently, compressed air, than ineffeciently compressed air. Also, once the SC becomes inefficient, then your chances of a heat soaked intercooler become greater. I want it to spool as early as it can while still meeting these criteria.

I don't know. I don't have enough experience with tuning SC's on a V-6 to make an educated guess. I would hope to see some boost by 3 grand though.
It is worth it IMO. Even if you don't plan on using those last few rpms, it's nice to have that cushion there to help defend against detonation.