Linson

if you are going to respond by telling me to do a search, then do not respond. its not as though i haven't been racking my brain with this for months. there are endless points and counter points, and i need to have my own particular conversation, especially with those who have been there and done it.

I want to take my '89 Formula 350 to the next level. there are 37k miles on the car and 7k miles on the mildly built L98 (Fast Burn heads, ZZ4 cam....)

as far as the performance for this street car, the increase from the Procharger is significant, but the greatest potential is with the LS1. also, the gains from the Procharger are somewhat ambiguous by comparison. and i have never heard of anyone being disappointed with the results from an LS swap.

cost is somewhat of an issue because i wouldn't want this project to stall out.
even though i can get a running LS F-body donor car for under 4 Gs in my area, and the Procharger kit alone is about a $5,000 hit, i am fairly certain that the LS swap would cost considerably more in the end. one reason for this is that i do not tend to do things on the cheap. for example, the LS1 will need to be rebuilt, and i can't not upgrade the cam, and at least have some work done on the heads. then, if i pull that L98, i'm gonna want to paint the engine bay - and if i paint the engine bay, i'm gonna want to paint the whole car ($$$). but even without going into the paint, it seems that "swap parts" i.e. cross members, motor mounts, wiring harnesses - things like that - would soon add up to quite a bit more than a belt driven supercharger that installs in a few hours. and i can always do the LS thing on my '67.

am i on track with my thinking in regards to the hidden costs of doing an LS1 swap?

what would you guys do & why?

no new tires

Don't buy a "kit" from -anybody-. Ill have just over 2500 in my "kit", when I have head unit rebuilt and finish piecing together the rest of the setup. Everything is brand new except the head unit and blower head pulleys.

Linson

is that a "turbocharger kit" or a "supercharger kit"?

no new tires

Procharger

Linson

Damn.
What is the nature of all these hidden costs?

anesthes

iTrader: (12)

I had a procharger for a little while. I think I sold it for $1500 or something to a forum member. Was a P1SC. They suck.

If you want to go blower, Vortech or torqstorm.

Personally, I'd do an LQ4 or LQ9 rather than the LS1. A stock LQ4 with a cam swap, and a blower will make 600+ hp. A LQ9 will make 500hp with cam and heads.

-- Joe

Linson

thanks, Joe.

why do so many people seem to recommend a truck 5.3 over an F-body 5.7? is it simply due to cost? won't a similarly modded LS1 make more power than an LQ?

or are people assuming turbocharging and prefer the LQ for the iron block? whats the deal there?
just sayin, 'cause the LS1 comes with a whole car... (trans, ecu, everything...)

Orr89RocZ

iTrader: (20)

If you are comparing a hot na ls1 build vs procharged 350, i would go blower alll day long

You'll make more power and cost wont all be that much different in the end once the ls1 is modded

A real good all motor ls1 stock cubes is 450-470 whp. Some forged internals big heads/single planes can make 500 whp but you need to turn upwards of 7500+ to see it

Procharged mild cam 350 will drive better than that super hot ls1

A well tuned 350 sbc can still achieve good fuel mileage. Ls1 typically seems to have abit better but it all depends. From my experience and close friends, real world results arent necessarily much better than modded sbc's. Power is power and it will consume fuel regardless

Truck 5.3 6.0 and even 4.8 are better bases for boost. They are stronger especially the later models with beefier rods

All motor wise, i would skip 4.8-5.3. 6.0 does make abit more power than ls1 with heads cam setups. Cubes help, the bigger bore helps

anesthes

iTrader: (12)

I don't know why people are recommending truck 5.3s.

LQ for the larger displacement.

I don't know anyone that builds actual LS1's. Everyone is doing 6.0s.

-- Joe

Orr89RocZ

iTrader: (20)

5.3's are great for boost. Small cubes work better with the small turbine budget turbos

Other than that, i wouldnt build them for all motor deals

Linson

yeah... maybe something to think about for my '67. although I had always envisioned something in the 376 ci range.

89gta383

iTrader: (5)

If you are cheap like me, you always buy used parts. used blower kits are out there, just have to jump on it when they appear, same with turbo headers. if you piece it out correctly, you can get what you need for cheaper than buying that $5k kit, just have to NOT be in a hurry, as you have to wait for deals to appear. If you are impatient, then spend the money and buy new.

Linson

What is the problem with P-1SC? is it that unit or is it Procharger in general? since my motor was not built for boost i was thinking P-1SC. also, Procharger is the only brand that makes kits for a TPI third gen.

is it a quality issue? do they not make power as advertised?

Linson

also, my engine should have a stockish 9.3:1 compression ratio.
i have heard (read) you say more than once that 8 or 9 psi doesnt make a noticeable power increase. P-1SC advertises 9-12 psi. can a stock engine handle 12 psi?
can my 7k mile engine with stock crank, scat rods/ARP bolts, hyp pistons handle 12 psi? not looking to create a time bomb.

Orr89RocZ

iTrader: (20)

Yes. But make sure your valvesprings are fresh. Not 100k mile stockers. You'll possibly float them above 7-8 psi depending on backpressure

There was a guy on this forum that squeezed 10 second passes out of a 383 with a p1sc. Overspinning it hard but worked. I think its a good blower for a stockish mild motor
D1 is for 500-700 whp guys imo. I tuned a 383 d1 tpi car and it was a bad little rig. 550 whp and torque for days.

anesthes

iTrader: (12)

Straight impeller, a design right out of the 1930s. The P1SC generates more heat than pretty much any centrifugal blower sold today, it's efficiency is like 60%.

The bracket mounting and belt tensioning system for Thirdgen is just a joke. But even if you fix that, you still have a garbage head unit that requires tons of intercooler to keep from detonating.

The D1SC is a better blower, but if you're gonna go centrifugal than get a Vortech.

-- Joe

-- Joe

86CamaroDan

I just put a Vortech V3 Si on mine, probably under $2,300 for the whole install, less a FMIC though. Very happy with it sofar, and im only running 5 psi with the medium bypass valve spring. the price for the third gen procharger kits are obnoxious.

Linson

where can I find a Vortech kit such as yours? Or did you have to piece it together?

When are you going to install an intercooler?

anesthes

iTrader: (12)

Are you still thinking LS or SBC?

He used the carb kit.

I made my own bracket to mount the blower on the passenger side.

You don't need an intercooler with a S-trim at low boost, heck, I ran one almost 14 psi without an IC. For my T-trim I'm running an air/water intercooler.

-- Joe

86CamaroDan

I called shannon @ shannons engineering, I think it was $2050+75 shipping out the door. Its a entire "universal carbureted" V3 kit with straight discharge tube (Custom ordered), but you drill 4 holes lower and you can get it to clear the hood. If i had to do it over again, I wouldnt have drilled the bracket as low as i could have gone, I had to grind the alternator case a little more than i wanted, but it works and i havent had any issues yet. Also i had to run a 01 grand prix power steering pulley as mine wouldnt clear the P/S box. Theres a whole thread in this section on doing it. Ill probably run a front mount this winter when i can take the nose off and take my time with it, that and when i get some more cash flow. I wanna do a nice treadstone IC, and then run a 8 rib belt setup with a 7" crank and a 3" blower pulley

Orr89RocZ

iTrader: (20)

I wouldnt advise running it for long periods of time under boost without some method of cooling. Iat rise is alot under 9+ psi

anesthes

iTrader: (12)

Depends largely on the blower.

The V3-Si is 78% efficient, which is quite amazing.

Using the formula:

(PR0.28-1) x Tabs


On a 70 degree day, 9 psi would have an outlet temperature of 168 degrees.

On a Turbo, with an adiabatic efficiency of around 60%, that same boost pressure would generate 198 degrees. This is mainly due to the excess heat transfer from the exhaust turbine, and the fact that the impeller on a turbo is spinning 3 times as fast.

-- Joe

86CamaroDan

****ing amazing you know that math! haha.

Orr89RocZ

iTrader: (20)

That doesnt account for heat soak and pump gas tune over time in a full 11-12 sec run. Engine bay will heat that blower and the intake air charge depending on filter location will never be ambient

Its your motor. 170+ on cast internals and pump gas is not my cup of tea

anesthes

iTrader: (12)

I assume his crate engine has forged pistons.

I'm just saying, the majority of Vortech kits are not intercooled. Fbodies, vettes, GM trucks, fox bodies, we're talking 20+ years and not many reported problems.

Run 14+ psi on a stock rotating assembly without an intercooler, well that is a different story.

-- Joe

86CamaroDan

Hypereutectic aluminum, What could go wrong? Its why im not running 10lbs out the box. a 383 short block is down the road. How far is anybodys guess

Orr89RocZ

iTrader: (20)

You just have to be careful. You want these things to live a long life so use what you can to help that. Imo intercooling on a street car is required. Its well worth the power gains too

86CamaroDan

Literally just had a brand new volvo come in this morning with a slightly dented intercooler that looks like it will fit in my grill perfect.

Kingtal0n

Belt-driven devices cause additional wear and tear on the engine. It is possibly a negative impact to long-term reliability to add a supercharger to anything.

If you can swap in an engine with low miles, especially a modern version (perhaps 02+) this can be a positive impact to long-term reliability.

A turbocharger is a positive impact to drivability and economy, if done correctly. That and the transmission is where to put the $$ first. Figure $8000 in a turbo/trans upgrade, and $1000 in the engine. That way you buy a few $1000 engines and squeeze each for 50-150k (that is a potential 150k-500k miles daily driver at 480rwhp~ or so for $1000 per engine).

tips for the turbo setup
blankets, wrap, coatings, fabricated support brackets, rear or front mount configuration, oil-less cartridges, alternative intercooling, methanol/water injection, a wideband sensor places 3-5 feet from the turbines

Can easily exceed $6000 in materials for this shopping list. Expect to spend $2000 on a transmission as well. Engines are last to get upgrades, if you have anything leftover after this you can literally dump any amount into engine(s). Its just that stock performance on any boost is already more than most can find HP, even after spending quite a bit more than 1k on an engine. The power comes out of a compressor, and we can always spice up the fuel. That LS-1 reliability list has some 700WHP configurations using stock pistons and truck engines.

all of this is written from the perspective of limited funds. A supercharger spins and vibrates/jostles with the crankshaft of an engine as it spins on a level only a computer can understand. Sometimes it can ruin engine bearings, it is not something I will willingly strap to an engine unless there is some kind of sponsorship or a race to win to make a profit, due to limited space or rules. Ask yourself if there is a way to get all the benefits of a supercharger without the additional wear and tear on the engine: a turbocharger provides a proven(time/history has shown them to be reliable when quality parts are used and the system is operating correctly), more reliable alternative with none of the significant harmonic, and parasitic drawbacks of a belt system.

JAYDUBB

Im curious as to how LSA's live so long with a belt driven supercharger strapped to it. Or an L67 3800 V6 (I do own one... 217000 miles. No bearing issues). Mercedes, GM, Ford, etc... all have sold cars with vibrating belt-driven blowers strapped to them. And they last. So I personally dont agree with the belt driven blower causing damage argument....

anesthes

iTrader: (12)

Don't believe everything you read on the interwebs.

-- Joe

Kingtal0n

A little OEM style blower is nothing. Think of the large displacement engines with big blowers- larger than anything you find on OEM vehicles. The bigger the blower, the more likely it will take more power from the engine to drive -> the more stress related failure induced to the crankshaft snout. Some engines tolerate this better than others, but it is definitely an issue you see crop up when you build hundreds of blown engines of various sizes, the bearing start coming out of the 700WHP+ motors pretty torn up I hear. A turbo offers none of this wear/tear feature and provides the same service with an economical boost to pump efficiency of the engine, with the major drawbacks of potential system complexity/packaging. The tiny delay feature of a turbine can be diminished if you know what you are doing, it is not worth considering as a fault feature (the ability to monitor and control exhaust gas flow->boost response makes up for any delay in operation)


Specifically about LS engines,

"On a Turbo motor I can make 100 pulls and tear it down, and the bearing look cherry,

On a blown motor, you can do 100 pulls and tear it down and the main bearing look like they are beat,
because in my opinion, the belt is just beating the $@(*# out of them"

- 6:35

anesthes

iTrader: (12)

Turbos destroy exhaust valves and guides, cook everything under the hood, and have the potential to explode filling the engine with metal.

Everything has pros and cons. Blowers don't become an issue with cranks and bearings until we're talking about 1500+ horsepower roots blowers. Even then, BBC crank snows and dual keyways are available. And realistically, the bearing load isn't any worse than the load of the flywheel turning the transmission. The rear being is beefier than the front for sure, but not enough to matter.

-- Joe

Kingtal0n

Many brand new, small displacement engines in vehicles expected to see 200k are coming with turbochargers (since 1989~ in Japan, but now America is producing them also) because they have become quite reliable, and improve economy like this. There are significantly more vehicles factory turbo than factory blown (there must be, because from an engineering perspective they are simply better). With good engineering the system is safe to operate, will not cook or explode. You also dont need to put a turbo under the hood if you do not want to, there are some 2000WHP vettes running around with dual rear mount systems. Also FWIW I wasn't thinking strictly about the resistance to turning, but more concerned about frequencies introduced to the rotating engine by the harmonics of the blower, which could have unexpected consequences like a disrupted oil film character. If there was any way possible to avoid introducing those harmonics into my already excessively damped rotating system which already has a host of it's OWN vibration issues, for which countless hours have already been spent trying to make it vibrate in many ways less by those engineers, well I would find and use it.

anesthes

iTrader: (12)

Many vehicles come with a turbo OEM, yes, typically small displacement engines. Improving economy isn't quite correct. In fact, Forbes did an article in 2012 about the number of new OEM small displacement engines coming with turbos:

http://www.forbes.com/sites/jimhenry.../#1baf8864691a

Which, states: " If anything, adding a turbocharger could produce worse gas mileage, not better."

Another article:

http://autoweek.com/article/car-news...s-trade-turbos


There is no doubt that OEM turbos, using cast iron manifolds on small displacement engines is reliable and work well. They make those little 1.6 and 2.0 engines act like bigger engines.

So you would think the OEM also puts turbos on their large displacement performance cars right? Nope.

1) Camaro ZL1
2) Dodge challenger SRT Hellcat
3) Audi S4
4) Cadillac CTS-v
5) Corvette
6) Jaguar f-type
7) Audi A6
8) Jaguar XJR
9) Roush Mustang

etc..

So basically the OEM is using turbos on small displacement low end vehicles, yet using superchargers on high end performance vehicles. And the turbos do work quite well on the small stuff. My sister has a new escape with the ecoboost and it almost drives like it has a 6 cylinder engine.


Comparing apples to oranges. A OEM engineered 2.0 liter turbo isn't quite the same as some guy building a camaro or corvette. Not for nothing, but if you've noticed the guys with the fast turbos on the forum seem to be either blowing up their combos or constantly tinkering with there stuff.
Guys with Vortech, Procharger, etc have had their combos together for 10+ years without issue.

I also noticed if you spend some time on yellowbullet or turbo forums, those guys seem to constantly have issues making their turbos run consistent. Lots of excuses, but generally speaking the turbo cars are less consistent and less predictable. Unless the OP has an OEM engineer willing to design a system for him, I suggest he goes with a off the shelf supercharger kit. Even the high end banks kits are temperamental.

It's a non issue.

The future isn't exhaust driven turbos, or belt driven superchargers anyway. It's electric driven turbo/centrifugal superchargers. Audi has pretty much pioneered this technology, and we've seen it very successful on the racetrack. 15-20% higher efficiency than exhaust driven turbos, with no lag, no exhaust back pressure, and no heat. Science is cool.

-- Joe

Orr89RocZ

iTrader: (20)

Bull!!

anesthes

iTrader: (12)

Speaking of guys blowing up their motor

Hows the new build coming along?

-- Joe

Orr89RocZ

iTrader: (20)

Lol the guys breaking stuff are the guys who actually race their stuff and push it hard. My car was together for years before last season i pushed it as hard as possible using parts never designed for the powerlevel i had. Only reason it had damage was because the turbo broke and engine swallowed blades. My fault for not running a filter. If that never happened it would still be together my guess.

And new build is coming along slow. Got alot of parts, still need to buy alot of parts

86CamaroDan

I dont agree with the blowers ruining crank bearings. Not that ive seen tons of race engines torn apart, but if a belt driven accessory is gonna ruin a crank journal then i would expect the serp belt to do the same thing. Now thats not to say that huge F1 blowers wont snap run into issues, but at 1K+ horsepower your probably gonna pin the crank before hand. I dont think my V3 is gonna cause me to eat crank bearings, nor do i think anyone expects to get to get 200K out of a performance engine. I feel turbos are on cars these days because their cheap. Mistubishi makes all the DSM, chrysler, and volvo turbo's, and boosting efficiency is the name of the game (Not to be confused with power) They all have a MPG criteria to meet. Me personally, I like the fact theres no hot piping, minimal exhaust restriction, and the power is right there when you bury that pedal.

Orr89RocZ

iTrader: (20)

Blowers are def harder on cranks. The big ones are. It takes alot of power to turn a big blower on big hp aps. Thats why guys get bbc snounts on cranks, you can snap the crank, which is putting load on front bearings.
Its why guys with turbos can go big power on stock bottom ends and live. You dont see huge blowers running with turbo cars on stock bottom end deals

You need a better quality crank and main caps for blowers vs comparable power turbo deals

Linson

Great seeing all this debate here, and the advise is appreciated. Right now I am leaning L98 + Procharger, although I might step up to one of the "D" blowers if they're a better, more efficient unit - presumably I can still manage the boost at levels safe for my stock crank, hypereutectic pistons, and 9.3:1 compression.
Too much invested in this 7k mile L98 to just scrap it, plus I have a '67 roller that I can do the LS thing on.

That's how I'm leaning.

86CamaroDan

No doubt. I dont think a P1, D1, V1, V2, V3 or any small blower will give anyone issues on a street driven car though. *Knocks on wood* On a side note, I did the MPG on my car out last weekend, and im averaging 2.3 MPG better with the blower than when i was NA.

Orr89RocZ

iTrader: (20)

Yeah for the most part, low power lower boost builds dont hurt anything

86CamaroDan

I was debating the LS swap for a while, but after realizing all the conversion stuff i needed, T56 conversion, new clutch, crossmember, control arms, Intake, LS1 accessories, new ignition pickup, that i would have been just as happy with what i have just superchargerd. Nothing wrong with a decently build SBC. I feel "kids" these days feel its LS swap or bust and it makes me kinda sad

anesthes

iTrader: (12)

I wasn't debating that, but he's comparing the reliability of an OEM 2.0 liter turbo to the pains of a 1000+ hp blower motor. The OP is asking about the same basic bolt on superchargers that have been around for 40 years.

A Vortech S or T trim, a procharger P1SC or D1, etc isn't going to cause any of that damage. I doubt even an F1 would.

The turbo and stock bottom end thing is a little misleading. The attitude on the turbo forums is to build as much power as possible with a Chinese turbo and a stock motor, cuz if it blows up they just buy another junkyard motor. And they blow them up all the time because the second it detonates, it doesn't care if it's a turbo or a blower, the piston comes apart.

Again, pros and cons to everything but he basically made it sound like the second you strap a blower to your car your crank is gonna call it quits. I ran a s-trim for years on a cast autozone crank with no issues.

-- Joe

86CamaroDan

[QUOTE=anesthes;6052696 I ran a s-trim for years on a cast autozone crank with no issues.

-- Joe[/QUOTE]

Thats suprising. With or without the blower.

anesthes

iTrader: (12)

LSx motors make more power per cubic inch, no debate. But the cost of the swap is hard to swallow, and LS stuff is expensive in general.

An LSx motor will bolt to a SBC transmission, I think you just need an adapter for the crank flange as the spacing is different.

I think a 6.0 with the same supercharger will probably make more power and idle better than an SBC. The valve angle and port shape of SBC heads really isn't designed for port injection.

But with that said, I have an SBC in my thirdgen and both of my corvettes.

-- Joe

anesthes

iTrader: (12)

The car was a manual trans too. I had forged TRW 2256 pistons, and pink rods.

I did eventually blow the car up, but not from bearing failure or crank failure, but from too small an injector, too much timing, etc. Car made over 560hp though.

This was well over a decade ago, before all the young kids joined the forum with their turbo builds. 560hp is slow now apparently. Although, I question exactly how well some of these thousand horsepower cars drive on the street. Then again, I'm getting old and I don't have patience for cranky idles, weird surges, loudness, etc.

-- Joe

Orr89RocZ

iTrader: (20)

For 1 most guys doin that are idiots and dont know what they are doing. 2, i am not talking about this. I am talking about from an engineering perspective, the turbo stuff is easier on the cranks than blowers. You can get away with more power on less quality internals than you can on blowers.

And if you ran a blower for years, what kinda performance did you get out of it? Any track times or dyno figures? You arent one of those guys who bolt on the kit and drive around just to say they have a supercharged car and never actually use it?

Orr89RocZ

iTrader: (20)

How it make 560 with too small injector and too much timing? Why let it run like that for too long?

And two of those 1000+ hp cars put on more miles on the street than half the members builds in this subforum... They drive just fine