- Joined
- 22 September 2005
- Messages
- 1,215
-
Protip: Profile posts are public! Use Conversations to message other members privately. Everyone can see the content of a profile post.
10.48 @ 139 mph HP Performance car
- Thread starter ccathey
- Start date
Don't forget the C16 Fuel you could probably run near NA ignition timing with decent race fuel. That might explain the higher HP numbers.
- Joined
- 12 July 2006
- Messages
- 98
We don't have c16 fuel here, but we use 113 octane at the track. The ignition timing is 18.5 degrees at its max. Much more conservative than the factory timing.
Craig
+1, I've gone from a CTSC in my future to an HP turbo. No doubt about it.
After reading this thread, I am having a huge dilema. I currently have a CTSC, so I dont know if I want to swap it out for this kit, or add on the high boost kit.
Decisions, decisions.
Nathan
whatever you do a turbo kit will make more power than a ctsc.
And for some reason, the turbo kits haven't popped engines... i'm not trying to say they won't (and there are obviously much less cars running Turbo vs. CTSC which should also be considered) but it seems like an awful lot of expense and work goes into having supercharger setups create considerably less power, and with no additional benefit of added reliability and engine safety.
That's pretty amazing, what boost do you run it on daily, and how many of those miles have actually been done with the kit on?
Congrats
Congrats
- Joined
- 12 July 2006
- Messages
- 98
That's pretty amazing, what boost do you run it on daily, and how many of those miles have actually been done with the kit on?
Congrats
I run it at 8.5 psi normally. The kit has been on the car around 5,500 miles.
Craig
- Joined
- 22 September 2005
- Messages
- 1,215
Superchargers take power to make power. Also the AEM unit is much more precise than the black box or whatever CT uses.
- Joined
- 24 January 2004
- Messages
- 1,470
There are very few (less then 20) turbo nsx on the road versus 300-400 supercharged nsx's on the road. Turbo kits HAVE broken nsx engines. your whole logic "it seems like an awful lot of expense and work goes into have a supercharger setups that creat less power".--- is flawed
A) A supercharger kit is a simpler and cleaner install
B) A supercharger kit (comptech) is SMOG legal in CA.. NO turbo kit is or will be smog legal.. so if having a car that can legallally be driven on the road is a priority to you.
C)my comptech kit makes 367 rwhp on a dynoget chassis dyno (autowave) at 5.5 PSI. I have been running it without issue for 5 years. This IS decent power for a nsx and has proven reliability. This is also comparible power to what a turbo kit at similar psi.
D) if your goal is big power, (over 400hp) then you need to build your engine - at least with forged pistons.. whether you go turbo or SC. Kips SC nsx makes 500 RWHP all day long and is the most track capable nsx .. period.
What makes a turbo or SC car reliable is a) your tuner, lean tune avoid detonation b) whether you run too much boost for the cast pistons and stock engine.
Thanks
ccathey we need a vid!!
Isn't one of the first things I mention that there are less turbo nsx's out there than ctsc's, and thus a direct comparison can't really be made?
I don't really see a CTSC being an easier or "cleaner" install? Bolting on different exhaust manifolds and clamping some pre-fabricated piping doesn't make it a "harder" install.
Why can't a turbo kit be smog legal? Its a matter of tuning just like anything else. I'm running a full standalone boosted engine in my current car and i've passed smog after tweaks in my fuel maps.
Basically I agree with what you're saying, i'm not trying to start some ctsc vs. turbo war... its been done before. Just two different ways to accomplish the same thing. My only worry is with CT going under, what is going to happen in the future for any reliability related and maintenance issues. Either way, your car sounds like a beast! Enjoy it in good health!
- Joined
- 24 January 2004
- Messages
- 1,470
da3dalus,
we are on the same page.
- comptech did go under but is back in business.
- regardless of whether comptech is around or not, the major parts of there system can be serviced with the manufacturers. IE deal with wipple or autoroter for blower service and vortec for fuel pressure regulator etc. (the major comptech piece was the intake manifold and that is not a wear item)
- in theory a turbo could be smog legal but like what comptech did with the SC kit, it would be costly and no other manufacturer has had the scale of business to do this.
Like you said turbo versus SC both are good ways to make power. also if i were going for all out power (ie over 500hp) i would also go turbo, however i don't think having that much power would be a plus for what i use the nsx for.
take care and keep us posted where you go.
we are on the same page.
- comptech did go under but is back in business.
- regardless of whether comptech is around or not, the major parts of there system can be serviced with the manufacturers. IE deal with wipple or autoroter for blower service and vortec for fuel pressure regulator etc. (the major comptech piece was the intake manifold and that is not a wear item)
- in theory a turbo could be smog legal but like what comptech did with the SC kit, it would be costly and no other manufacturer has had the scale of business to do this.
Like you said turbo versus SC both are good ways to make power. also if i were going for all out power (ie over 500hp) i would also go turbo, however i don't think having that much power would be a plus for what i use the nsx for.
take care and keep us posted where you go.
I think more engines have fallen prey to the BBSC than turbo kits, the key point being the tuning is what breaks nsx engines, not the method of forced induction.
The old mechtech aerodyne twin turbo set was smog legal, fwiw.
With equal levels of boost, comparable flow rates, and proper tuning, a turbocharger *should* be able to produce more power than a supercharger, as it is by nature a more-efficient solution. The problem is the initial creation of boost, where the supercharger has the capability of providing instant response, which can be marginalized by proper turbine sizing. If the turbocharger setup is properly assembled, and sized, it should provide an advantage over a comparable supercharged car, assuming a quality tune.
There are a few bolt on turbo nsx's that have gone past this number, and they have not yet run into issues. Craig's nsx, the focus of this post, is well over 400rwhp without opening his engine, and he has driven 5500 miles with his turbo kit. My nsx, after disabling VVIS, is at 418.8rwhp at 8psi - I have driven 6000 miles with this turbo, with power levels ranging from 372rwhp to the current power level, achieved last month.
Having used both a supercharger and turbocharger solution on my nsx I feel the turbocharger offers several advantages, with regard to engine wear, over the supercharger solution. One of the primary advantages is intake temperature; both the comptech and Gruppe M I used to own are hot air superchargers, with IAT's anywhere from 160-175F; on my turbocharger, which is aftercooled, my IAT's are well under 120F, even on the hottest of days. The use of an AEM EMS also allows for the car to be completely optimized for this new forced induction method, resulting in both the capability to produce more power, and superior reliability assuming a proper tune. So, if we have a turbo that is running at the same boost level as a supercharger kit, but the turbo offers cooler IAT's and is running on a fully optimized EMS, how is the supercharger more reliable? The turbocharger itself is produced by Garrett, a company that has been in business since the 1930's, producing both turboprop engines and turbochargers. The piping is steel, ceramic coated by jet hot; the electronics are produced by AEM, who also produces components used in the CTSC, so where is the weak point? If anything turbo kits, such as the one produced by HP performance, are less invasive to the car than the CTSC, which requires removal of the intake manifold, and have less moving parts.
- Joined
- 24 January 2004
- Messages
- 1,470
John,
Agree with most of your post except the end where you state that the turbo install is less invasive. my two eyes tell me that is not the case.
With a SC you have cleaner header and exhaust solutions. (use off the shelf comptech or gt one header with a arc or gruppe m exhaust. this to me is a far cleaner and then what i've seen with a turbo setup - it would be nice if one of the turbo companies would offer a really clean header and exhaust setup with high quality materials and perfect welding, but i have not seen this. Also due to the fact the the turbo is driven off the hot exhaust gas you have components thats looks are compromised due to the effects of heat and moisture etc. Also with your intercooled turbo you have a water pump, water tank mounted up front with water lines running the lenght of the car. don't get me wrong, i'm not saying any of this is bad, just defending the cleaness of the supercharger setup. in contrast a SC solution, where all components are mounted on top of the engine. the exhaust is not effected and the components are not subject to the effects of the extreme exhaust heet is cleaner.
With regards to your comments on the AEM. while this does allow complete control to the tuner to set up the car, it does make the car illegal and does compromise the cold start of the car and not allow the car to be driven from sea level to 10,000 feet. (i have first had experience with this solution on there cars and the cold start and other aspects of the tune are not up to the oem level) with the drive by wire nsx honda made sure that the engine tune did not contribute to snap oversteer on throtte off, i have never seen a aem do this.
Again, my decision was that i wanted a less invasive solution both with respect to how it is installed on the car and with regard to the tuning solution. In my opinion the comptech sc setup is great in this area in that it is the cleanest install, is a simple and proven reliable tuning solution and is also the only sone that is smog legal.
again, as stated above, if your goal is big power then i think you are better suited to a turbo solution with a standalone engine management (AEM, etc) if i were building a drag car then i would go turbo with AEM, but if i were buiding a drag car it would not be my supercharged nsx or supercharged s2000.
thanks
Tom
Agree with most of your post except the end where you state that the turbo install is less invasive. my two eyes tell me that is not the case.
With a SC you have cleaner header and exhaust solutions. (use off the shelf comptech or gt one header with a arc or gruppe m exhaust. this to me is a far cleaner and then what i've seen with a turbo setup - it would be nice if one of the turbo companies would offer a really clean header and exhaust setup with high quality materials and perfect welding, but i have not seen this. Also due to the fact the the turbo is driven off the hot exhaust gas you have components thats looks are compromised due to the effects of heat and moisture etc. Also with your intercooled turbo you have a water pump, water tank mounted up front with water lines running the lenght of the car. don't get me wrong, i'm not saying any of this is bad, just defending the cleaness of the supercharger setup. in contrast a SC solution, where all components are mounted on top of the engine. the exhaust is not effected and the components are not subject to the effects of the extreme exhaust heet is cleaner.
With regards to your comments on the AEM. while this does allow complete control to the tuner to set up the car, it does make the car illegal and does compromise the cold start of the car and not allow the car to be driven from sea level to 10,000 feet. (i have first had experience with this solution on there cars and the cold start and other aspects of the tune are not up to the oem level) with the drive by wire nsx honda made sure that the engine tune did not contribute to snap oversteer on throtte off, i have never seen a aem do this.
Again, my decision was that i wanted a less invasive solution both with respect to how it is installed on the car and with regard to the tuning solution. In my opinion the comptech sc setup is great in this area in that it is the cleanest install, is a simple and proven reliable tuning solution and is also the only sone that is smog legal.
again, as stated above, if your goal is big power then i think you are better suited to a turbo solution with a standalone engine management (AEM, etc) if i were building a drag car then i would go turbo with AEM, but if i were buiding a drag car it would not be my supercharged nsx or supercharged s2000.
thanks
Tom
Numbers look great. Good job!
Has anyone actually used a FI NSX to race?
I'll let Factor X answer this one. But you can check the "Track Talk" forum if you want the details. And based on looking at their newest track car, I will say that you'll see a lot more trophies in the near future at their shop as well. :smile:
- Joined
- 24 January 2004
- Messages
- 1,470
one of the most famous nsx race cars, If not THE most famous NSX race cars was the real time racing nsx driven by peter cunningham. This nsx ran a one off vortech centrifcal(?sp) sc setup and produced an estimate 650 RWHP. The power was all at the top end of the rev range and would not be streetable. this design was the inspiration for the current dali boostzilla setup -- at obviously much lower levels of boost.
Other than that Kip olsons comptech nsx was the american touge winner in year one. the factor X nsx would have won year two if a certain nissan skyline had not shown up.
finally danny from vegas has a turbo nsx (claimed 1000 crank hp) that won the ultimate street car challenge (by sport compact car) last year.
Other than that Kip olsons comptech nsx was the american touge winner in year one. the factor X nsx would have won year two if a certain nissan skyline had not shown up.
finally danny from vegas has a turbo nsx (claimed 1000 crank hp) that won the ultimate street car challenge (by sport compact car) last year.
Being a Brit i'm not too clued up on these sort of events, but isn't a touge just a one off thing, for a couple of laps? Or is it actually like 12 rounds a year of hard racing?
Is this the Ultimate Street Car Challenge?
http://www.sportcompactcarweb.com/features/0403scc_uscc_challenge/index.html
Again, seems to be a one of event opposed to an actual race series...?
Is this the Ultimate Street Car Challenge?
http://www.sportcompactcarweb.com/features/0403scc_uscc_challenge/index.html
Again, seems to be a one of event opposed to an actual race series...?
- Joined
- 24 January 2004
- Messages
- 1,470
rob, yes you are correct the american touge was a one a year event that was held in december in california, where the japanese "drift king" would come over and drive US tuner cars and determine the best of the best.
your other link is for the ultimate stree car challenge that i referred to and last year that honor was one by Danny's FI nsx.
your other link is for the ultimate stree car challenge that i referred to and last year that honor was one by Danny's FI nsx.
i also agree that a SC setup is messier than a turbo...this is an opinion comment i guess but a turbo is WAY easier to install....
this picure shows the system as it would install......if you can bolt on a muffler....you can bolt on my system...and prolly lovefabs too, although his is somewhat different...
oh yeah great job on those numbers...good to see this car is not as dead as it feels....
this picure shows the system as it would install......if you can bolt on a muffler....you can bolt on my system...and prolly lovefabs too, although his is somewhat different...
oh yeah great job on those numbers...good to see this car is not as dead as it feels....
Similar threads
