GoRideSno

Cool HP,
We're on the same page. As you mention there is not any way to stop the missuse of anything anyone posts. Prevention is impossible. People could even remove watermarks from pictures. Again, for me, the copyright notice is help expedite punishment of anyone that would use my info in a negative fashion towards me or anyone else. I am told that without the copyright mark you would't stand much of a chance.

Andy K

GoRideSno

Tony,
Sorry about your post getting diluted so. I almost just went ahead and started a thread on this in the off topic forum. I should have done it, as I mentioned I knew after the initial question was asked this would happen.

Now just wait till someone trys to answer Marc's question. It will really snowball.
Well everyone is playing good on the thread atleast so....
Marc,
I consider my 398.2rwhp at just under 7psi v/s Don T's 403rwhp at 7psi to be as close to an apples to apples comparison as there is. Both cars '87 S4 automatics. I had x-pipe and a little less boost and he had an RMB. He gets me by about 5 Hp on the top end. If you average out several points along the power curve for each car you'll see that my car makes about 15%+ total HP from 4500 rpms to redline. The advantage is even larger at lower rpms.

Someone else though likes to display, as often as possible, my 6.7psi dyno for my '87 S4 automatic, x-pipe, twin-screw setup transposed onto a dyno of an '88 5 speed centrifugaled at 8psi with modified exhausts and chips and claim that is a fair comparison. They don't bother to mention that the centrifugaled car has chips, exhaust mods, more boost or the fact that the car is a 5 speed.

Andy K

GoRideSno

Don't do it H. People will just get more confused.
Edit: Now that you've deleted all your posts Heinrich, it looks kinda like HP and I are talking to ourselves.
Everyone just stop now or start a topic in off tppic.


Andy K

hacker-pschorr

I too caught up day dreaming about owning a day-glow green 928 to have any thoughts about SC'ers at the moment.

To get back on topic -
Tony,
Since this year our annual vegas trip was traded in for my GF to have some elective surgery done, we are planning a weekend trip down towards the end of winter. Look forward to seeing your setup in person. Lets take it over to Gene's dry lake south of Vegas and shoot some video.

heinrich

Apples to apples comparison? It matters not if you huff more air into the cylinders with a drinking straw, or have Godzilla huff it in, or if you use a turbo, or a supercharger. The air goes in, it explodes and it exits.

The point being that you can make more horses with both superchargers than the engine can take. So an apples-to-apples comparison depends on factors such as:

driveline strain
intercooling efficiency
spin-up efficiency
waste
expended energy
breathing on the exhaust side
and so-on.

We already know that the positive displacement unit makes comparatively more low-rev torque and the centrifugal makes it in higher revs. Looking at the torque curves that we already have, is all I need. Nothing new.

jorj7

Marc/Andy,

It's probably too early to compare mine to Tony's since we both
have a lot of debugging and tuning to go, but here is my attempt
using his data (hope you don't mind Tony) and mine. My dyno
data was taken on June 20th on Tom Cloutier's dynapack (which
is different from a dynojet, but was close from 3-5.5K rpm and
10 rwhp down at 6K on my stock baseline runs). This was with
91 pump gas, without the restrictive air intake tube. The max boost
was 5.7 psi at 6K, starting at 2 psi at 3K.



From the graph, it looks like the amount of boost determines the hp,
and the Tony had more boost at the lower rpm, but about the same at
the upper end. I'm sure there are a lot more variables, and it'll require
more tuning to get our systems optimized.

heinrich

What comes before 3000 RPM George?

heinrich

I ask because to me, the area under 3k is critically important. I drive only on the street.

GoRideSno

Jorj7,
Are you using the Tim Murphy Supershark 8psi kit? Do you have any other mods to your car?

Andy K

jorj7

By the way, it was making 5 psi at 6.3 K rpm. From the data, it appears that the belt was
slipping starting at about 5.5 k. From the looks of the boost chart, the boost should have
been around 8-8.5 psi at 6.3 K if there was no slippage, so there is more hp to be had there.
But then the comparison would not be between the same boost unless you consider 8 psi at
3K to 8 psi at 6K the same.

jorj7

Andy,

The engine/drivetrain was stock before the install except for Nology plug wires and RMB.

GoRideSno

Here is my 6.7 psi dynochart with my intercooled twin-screw setup.
87S4 automatic, 120k mi, x-pipe.
feel free to plot it on the graph too Jorj.

Andy K

jorj7

Heinrich,

The dyno run started at 2.5 K and was at 150 rwhp. I used the 3K starting point because my
other dyno runs had started around 3K.

GoRideSno

Jorj,
Do you ahve a before install dyno chart?
Andy K

Pedro Whalero

Here's mine. 1988 S4, Auto, Tim Murphy kit. Nology Wires, Ott X-Pipe, RMB and No Cats.

Enjoy.

Pete Whelan