Factor X vs. Gerry Johnson's Turbos

[GQ NSX]

Jmho, but tuning is a big part of FI. I've always figured by the time I do decide on a "more power" solution, it will most certainly be tuned. A poorly tuned car will not have the desired results. Having spent a lot of time with Mustang/Supra owners, I've seen the difference between a dependable, efficient car and a poorly running turd is simply the tuning.

To me its all the difference in the world.

 

[NetViper]

Don't get me wrong, Dave. I didn't say you would need an AEM. Point is that the AEM is far superior (for OBDII) than what you would get from the CTSC, and to compare values in an apples to apples world it needs to be factored into the equation. If you were to ask me would I personally go with an AEM with a CTSC, that is an entirely different question.

If we are comparing how much I would need to spend to get the most peformance, obviously a turbo is going to be a better buy.

If we are comparing what the majority of this people who want a little extra power should buy, I think the answer may be a little less clear.

 

[KGP]

If we are comparing what the majority of these people who want a little extra power should buy, I think the answer may be a little less clear.

Absolutely. Much more to factor in than performance. Case in point: At the begining of the thread I mentioned that I though the Bell system, in combo with an AEM, would really be a good answer to many FI consumers wants. One reason is that the Bell system can retain the cats, while the FX and GJTC systems can't (at least not at this point). The SC solutions retain the cats as well, and many people will/would go that route simply because they don't want to hassle with emissions tests. Plenty of other stuff to consider. You're certainly right about that, Dave.

 

[NetViper]

You're certainly right about that, Dave.

Well, it feels good to be right about something for once!

 

[KGP]

As far as the low end TQ. Have you driven them both?

No, I have not driven the CTSC, only ridden in it. As you know, sjs has both a CTSC and a Bell car. I just never felt the urge to ask him to let me drive the CTSC. I have driven the Bell car though, and it feels much stronger down low (and everywhere) than the CTSC. Len has a CTSC. He might be able to give you his seat-o-pants dyno meter on that.

Originally posted by NetViper
I have not seen a DYNO for the Factor X FX400 kit? Have you?

Yes, but it was almost a year ago, and I honestly couldn't tell you what the numbers were.

 

[len3.8]

I can get the CTSC installed for a TOTAL cost of $7900 at Goodson.

As far as the low end TQ. Have you driven them both? Like I said, I did not get to drive the Turbo, but my impression was that the CTSC was still better at 2500 RPM. Infact, Mikey at Factor X said for track competition nothing bets the CTSC for low end TQ. He really likes the unit.

Driven Both, which both? I rode in FactorX's car. I have had both CTSC's on my car. I have been in Gerry's car. Been at the shop.
Hell , have you even driven a CTSC car?
Driven 2 BBSC's, ect. ect. I have been doing my homework.
I am sorry I ruffled your feathers, I was simply stating what I felt as I actually drove and dynoed my car with the CTSC on it.

Yes I have seen the numbers reported for the FactorX 400 car.
See me in a couple of months or so and I will let you know how it feels to have the Full engine rebuild and turbo system.

 

[NetViper]

No, I have not driven the CTSC, only ridden in it. As you know, sjs has both a CTSC and a Bell car. I just never felt the urge to ask him to let me drive the CTSC. I have driven the Bell car though, and it feels much stronger down low (and everywhere) than the CTSC. Len has a CTSC. He might be able to give you his seat-o-pants dyno meter on that.

Well, like I said, If I had driven both cars back to back my opinion might be totally different.

 

[NetViper]

Hell , have you even driven a CTSC car?
Driven 2 BBSC's, ect. ect. I have been doing my homework.
I am sorry I ruffled your feathers, I was simply stating what I felt as I actually drove and dynoed my car with the CTSC on it.

No problem.
I drove Lud's CTSC with mod's galore. LOVED it.
I drove a BBSC long before the lastest stuff. It was OK. High-end power was cool. Low was not.
I have only rode in one turbo, Factor X, and it was GREAT! AGAIN, remember I did not ride in the car in FX500++ form. It was only making 400-420HP vs 500-640HP. I am sure that would have BLOWN me away. (Damn you Gene!)

Regardless, I am sure you know a hell of a lot more about it than I do. I was merely stating my opinion.

 

[KGP]

Well, it feels good to be right about something for once!

Now Dave, I only directly challenged you on one point, and even then I could well be wrong. It wouldn't be the first time.

Don't ya just love it when the FI pot gets stirred a bit?

 

[Sig]

Comptech SC 6psi vs. Turbo low-end torque

I believe a normal Comptech SC has an average peak torque in the neighborhood of 250 lb/fts. Their peak torque is reached in the low 4000's, around 4200 or so.

Both JG turbo and Factor X's turbos at 6 psi are cruising past the 250 mark around 3500 rpms or a sooner depending on the turbo trim.

The high boost CTSC crosses the 250lbs tq a bit earlier than the 6psi CTSC, around 3100-3200 rpms. This may be a smidge quciker than the turbos, but only by 100-200 rpms and would not be noticeable. At least to me.

Both reg boost CTSC and the high-boost variety surpass 200lbs tq in the early 2000's, but so do both of the turbos being discussed.

The interesting thing about comparing low-end torque amongst the systems discussed here is the relevancy of how early you feel tq numbers that are close to peak torque for the given system. With a 6psi CTSC at 225 lbs tq, you are at 90% of the peak number of 250. So it feels like, whoa, this things has great low-end(and it does). With the turbos, you could have more than 225 lbs tq at the same rpm as the CTSC, but at 50% of the peak torque you will feel a few thousand rpm's later, it does not seem to have the same low-end in the very early rpms. This is only because your body remembers the force of the peak torque much more than the lower torque levels.

With the trubo kits discussed here, whether or not they are tuned for 400 hp or 500 hp, the low-end and spool up characteristics will not be much different due the fact the same turbo is used for both horsepower levels. One variable that would change things is if the car retained stock internals. Stock pistons will produce a bit more power down low than low-comp builds.

 

[KGP]

Regardless, I am sure you know a hell of a lot more about it than I do. I was merely stating my opinion.

I'm not sure about that. Sure, and much of everything here is subjective. That's what is fun about the FI pot.

Dave, all that "I drove" stuff reminds me of something; I don't have shiteola to drive right now. In fact, neither does Len.

 

[NetViper]

I don't have shiteola to drive right now. In fact, neither does Len.

Advanatge NA

 

[len3.8]

I'm not sure about that. Sure, and much of everything here is subjective. That's what is fun about the FI pot.

Dave, all that "I drove" stuff reminds me of something; I don't have shiteola to drive right now. In fact, neither does Len.

Actually Len, has a old friend up his sleeve... Just gotta go pick it up. It has 2 turbos and goes pretty darn fast.
A couple of Audis, A 90 Jeep.
But KGP is right, I haven't been able to drive my NSX in almost a year. Going through severe withdrawals as far as that car is concerned.

 

[NetViper]

But KGP is right, I haven't been able to drive my NSX in almost a year. Going through severe withdrawals as far as that car is concerned.

There should be some kind of group therapy for people that cannot drive their NSX's because of weather or repairs. I don't know how you do it!

 

[KGP]

There should be some kind of group therapy for people that cannot drive their NSX's because of weather or repairs.

There is! It's called nsxprime.com/forums

 

[len3.8]

There should be some kind of group therapy for people that cannot drive their NSX's because of weather or repairs. I don't know how you do it!

A whole lot of CURSING!!!!

On the CTSC being bolt on and go, If you get one, please get that all important leak down and compression check before you install it, as well as make sure that the person installing it knows what they are doing. It may be plug and play but others have found out differently when a few other variables are thrown in the mix.
You will want to check the AF on those as well. Also the fuel delivery system. As nice as the CTSC is desgned, you still have to get it installed. Or you could have this to look at.

 

[sjs]

No, I have not driven the CTSC, only ridden in it. As you know, sjs has both a CTSC and a Bell car. I just never felt the urge to ask him to let me drive the CTSC. I have driven the Bell car though, and it feels much stronger down low (and everywhere) than the CTSC. Len has a CTSC. He might be able to give you his seat-o-pants dyno meter on that.

As Gene said, I have both, and running the same peak boost the turbo smokes the CTSC at both low and high RPM. The only place they might be close is the SC’s sweet spot in the middle of the power band, and even there the turbo is faster. Anyone who tells you a CTSC or BBSC produces more low-end torque than a turbo of equal boost potential is badly mistaken.

 

[Elite]

If your power goals are in the 400ish range(stock internals). Then you can match a turbo to best suit those needs. And at that relatively low hp #, the turbo will be pretty small. Meaning a very large powerband. The smaller the rurbo the more torque and sooner. With a turbo that small it should spool very quickly with the displacement of the NSX. The only side effect of a small turbo may be that the power may fall off a little near redline.