Novi 1000:2000, Getting Suckered

[kpond]

For you BBSC folks out there, I understand that some want to move from the Novi 1000 to a Novi 2000. For the life of me, I can't figure a single logical reason for the move. You all know that technically there's no explanation, right? I talked to the Paxton guys during SEMA at length... and THEY couldn't offer a single reason. Is someone promising you more performance? If so, have you seen ANY proof of that - namely in the form of a dyno sheet? In fact, a dyno sheet is not even needed. If there was even a psi by rpm chart out there comparing a 1000 to a 2000, in theory you should see more boost sooner and maybe retionalize the benefits. I don't think either this psi by rpm chart or the Novi 1000:2000 dyno charts even exist... but despite that some of you are laying your money down. Does the Novi 2000 upgrade also come with the "Spiralmax" thingamajig and a "fuel molecule alignment" thingamajig?? If so, I think they are just as likely to add HP as the Novi 2000 is.

There's a lot of BS out there. More and more these days, IMHO. I'd love to hear the reasons or better yet to see ANY evidence that a 2000 is better on an NSX than a 1000.

Let's make a quick summary of the facts:

1. The base BBSC kit is sound, albeit still immature and needs more tuning.
2. Low compression motor + BBSC = Base BBSC HP, at best and less "area under the curve".
3. BBSC + Aftercooler = Base BBSC HP + potential overheating + add'l failure points. No HP or area under curve benefits.
4. BBSC + Novi2000 = base BBSC w/Novi 1000 + lighter wallet

Please, someone PROVE me wrong. (I want ALL of the above to yield the benefits they were SUPPOSED too - but all have been failures to date.)

 

[nsxxtreme]

I think you may have posted this in the wrong forum. I think the benifits is that they will be able to obtain higher boost. I'm thinking a Novi 1200 would have been more appropriate. Interesting enough Paxton doesn't list the maps on their website.

I'm interested in knowing the reasoning for the switch.

[This message has been edited by nsxxtreme (edited 22 December 2002).]

 

[kpond]

nsxxtreme,

Why do you say this is the wrong forum? This IS the forum for SC discussion. Thanks for your guess. The Novi 1000 is used in several other applications and is good up to at least 14psi - comfortably. As far as I am aware, no one is out there running more than 9psi on a BBSC. I would think that most owners (stock motor internals) would at most want 9-10psi... so the Novi 1000 still fills that ticket quite nicely.

No, I don't think max boost is a reason to rationalize a change.

 

[nsxxtreme]

Originally posted by kpond:
nsxxtreme,

Why do you say this is the wrong forum?

No, I don't think max boost is a reason to rationalize a change.

You posted this originally in the parts for sale forum. I think Lud moved it.

It is if they are able to obtain the higher boost earlier and more efficiently. The only way to tell is with a compressor map.


[This message has been edited by nsxxtreme (edited 22 December 2002).]

 

[Factor X Motorsports]

We agree with Kpond on this one. In our humble opinion there is no reason to go to the NOVI 2000. The NOVI 1000 is already a larger than needed compressor for the NSX. Although the NOVI 2000 will produce more volume, velocity is the key with the Honda head. For example, try porting a Honda head like you would a small block chevy (we did

) you will actually lose hp due to slower air velocity. Compressor matching seems to be a lost art these days. After all would you put a Diesel Truck Turbo on a B16?

Speed Safely,

Factor X Engineering www.factorxengineering.com

 

[KODIAC]

Originally posted by kpond:

Let's make a quick summary of the facts:

1. The base BBSC kit is sound, albeit still immature and needs more tuning.
2. Low compression motor + BBSC = Base BBSC HP, at best and less "area under the curve".
3. BBSC + Aftercooler = Base BBSC HP + potential overheating + add'l failure points. No HP or area under curve benefits.
4. BBSC + Novi2000 = base BBSC w/Novi 1000 + lighter wallet

Please, someone PROVE me wrong. (I want ALL of the above to yield the benefits they were SUPPOSED too - but all have been failures to date.)

I dont think all have been failures to date....

I think #1 has yeilded the benefits promised. Granted tuning is required, but once you got it set, cant knock it.

As far as switching to the 2000 blower, I am against this for the 6psi BBSC kit, it runs good, now for the 9psi version, maybe, but can't say for sure without first seeing how the 9psi kit runs.

And the Intercooler options, these I think are showing promise, again tuning is needed. Also, this may require the summer/winter maps, for the drastic changes in temperature respectively.

Havn't seen a BBSC with low compres. so I can't make an educated opinion on this option.

as for option #4, i think it may improve your safety, and blower life especially with the 9psi kit. Granted its a big expense, and isnt really required, but there may be some added safety to this route. But, i can only see the added expense if your running an I/C or A/C at high boost levels, remember the 9psi kit will have a blow off set to vent the top 3psi, so still making 6lb but much much sooner. (at least that was my understanding of the 9lb kit.) It may improve safety, but the safety of the 1000 i think is more than adaquate for almost every operation mentioned.


JMHO,

Mike

 

[NSXTC]

Hey Kendall-

Ill be back in town after new years, with a Novi 2k on my car. Drop me a line and we can set up another multi-car test drive on those farm roads. Maybe Tino can bring back his 360F1?

 

[kpond]

Kodiak,

The base kit maps are barely acceptable. Too much to go into here but maybe a "75" on a scale of 1-100. Still occasional CELs, often rich (better than lean, I guess), minor "trailer hitching" at throttle tip-in, very non-linear a/f curves. So, no, I disagree that the base kit has "yielded the benefits promised". Yes, it has provided top HP numbers in the 380-400 RWHP range... but there are other issues still not discussed here very much. (Those have been taken to a private discussion group.)

You comment about the aftercooler kits showing promise. Based on what? Last I saw someone spoke about getting a 30 degree air temp drop. All that plumbing, expense, and real estate for a "mere" 30 degrees? Also, I have YET to see an aftercooler car with dyno numbers the same as let alone better than a non-aftercooler car. That's showing promise??

As for the low-compression cars... I suppose if you want to build a good 1/4mi NSX, this might be A way to go. The "low torque under 5000 rpm" problem is going to be worsened but presumably can be made up with some stronger-than-otherwise-capable boost up top. However, if you don't run the strong boost on the top, you're always going to be chasing the higher compression cars.

Regarding your saftey-related comments on the Novi 2000 over the 1000, I'm sorry but I have no idea what point you're trying to make. Are you saying that you think the Novi 2000 is somehow more "industrially" designed or can somehow produce boost more safetly than a 1000? Again, keep in mind that we are talking about "only" 10-12 psi.... maximum. Either SC can easily accomplish that.

 

[Lud]

Originally posted by kpond:
but there are other issues still not discussed here very much. (Those have been taken to a private discussion group.)

I thought the private discussion group was for issues with BETA TESTING of NEW configurations, not issues with production systems. That was the stated purpose, at least..??

 

[Sig]

For most posting in this thread the differences between the 2000 and the 1000 are known. For those unfamiliar with the two models, the principal difference between the two is:
The 2000 does not need to spin as fast as he 1000 to create the same amount of boost. Additionally, the 2000 has a higher top-end capacity.
How large is the delta for boost efficiency..... I don't know or care to calculate. However, if the difference is significant, then to some it would be enough value to make the change.

In addition, if the revolutions to create equal amount of boost is reduced by a good margin... then appreciable boost should come on sooner with the 2000. Another benefit. Once again, how much sooner is the question. I myself, would like to see dynos too before I pass judgement.

 

[KODIAC]

Originally posted by kpond:
Kodiak,

The base kit maps are barely acceptable. Too much to go into here but maybe a "75" on a scale of 1-100. Still occasional CELs, often rich (better than lean, I guess), minor "trailer hitching" at throttle tip-in, very non-linear a/f curves. So, no, I disagree that the base kit has "yielded the benefits promised". Yes, it has provided top HP numbers in the 380-400 RWHP range... but there are other issues still not discussed here very much. (Those have been taken to a private discussion group.)

Yes, this is something that should be discussed in the private forum, but i felt compelled to share my view here also.
Yes, the base maps are maybe 75% but remember this is a beta, and as part, there will be room for improvement. I can recall one BBSC that has gone under extensive tuning, and hase a very good a/f of 12.0 across the board, only devieating +/- .4
i think that is a pretty good a/f and does not have that dip that everyone sees around 5k. but again this should be discussed in the private forum, this is just my opinion.

You comment about the aftercooler kits showing promise. Based on what? Last I saw someone spoke about getting a 30 degree air temp drop. All that plumbing, expense, and real estate for a "mere" 30 degrees? Also, I have YET to see an aftercooler car with dyno numbers the same as let alone better than a non-aftercooler car. That's showing promise??

I think that the IC/AC option may still hold some merit, this has not been explored that much, and should be given some time to truely gauge the results.

As for the low-compression cars... I suppose if you want to build a good 1/4mi NSX, this might be A way to go. The "low torque under 5000 rpm" problem is going to be worsened but presumably can be made up with some stronger-than-otherwise-capable boost up top. However, if you don't run the strong boost on the top, you're always going to be chasing the higher compression cars.

I agree on the low comp. but I have not personally seen any results from the low-comp. NSX's so I cannot say, but if they are gonna build a low-comp, then obviously they will be running the higher boost levels, and will suffer loss for the low end torque.

Regarding your saftey-related comments on the Novi 2000 over the 1000, I'm sorry but I have no idea what point you're trying to make. Are you saying that you think the Novi 2000 is somehow more "industrially" designed or can somehow produce boost more safetly than a 1000? Again, keep in mind that we are talking about "only" 10-12 psi.... maximum. Either SC can easily accomplish that.

I am not saying that the 2000 is more "industrial suited." Both blowers are very good, my point on the safety value, is that on the 1000 blower, with a max CFM of 850, you will be spinning the blower faster than you would be spinning the 2000 blower(max CFM of 1700) to achieve the same CFM. Also, the 2000 is designed to produce higher boost levels, so IMO running the 2000 blower for 9psi vs running the 1000 blower at 9psi, is safer. Reason being, you wont be approaching the max RPM of the blower. Also, the 1000 blowers oil capacity is another issue, but i wont discuss that here.
I am not knocking the 1000 blower, i think it is fine, but for those that want to get the 2000 blower, its there car, there choice, but if they decide that they wanted to run a smaller pulley, and a variable blow off to build boost faster, and still maintain the same top boost level on the engine, and vent the extra boost.

this is just my opinion, and everyone has there own opinions. If someone wants to change to the 2000 blower, its there decision.

sorry if i ruffled any feathers...

mike

 

[nsxxtreme]

I guess since there is still a private forum for the BBSC then it isn't complete yet. You Private forum members be sure to let us know when it is now longer shrouded in secrecy so the rest of us can make an informed buying decision.

Thank You

 

[kpond]

Kodiak,

You didn't ruffle any of my feathers - don't worry about that. To the contrary, I appreciate the discussion. Regarding the private BBSC forum - it seems that you *may* have interpretted my comments as encouraging the use of the private forum. However, I am with nsxxtreme on this issue and would prefer that everything is discussed publicly.... for anything that's available for sale publicly. (I think this is the distinction Lud had as well.) And it is for EXACTLY the reason the nsxxtreme said - so that our colleagues here can make an informed decision. For the record, I co-moderate the private forum which has been largely inactive - less someone feel that they are missing out on something.

When I purchased my BBSC - more than 8 months ago, I was led to believe that it was "production". I was NOT interested to be a beta guinea pig... but here I/am we/are. There are still several issues... and commitments unfulfilled.

 

[greatimes]

This is the first I have heard that problems exist with the BBSC. I assumed that the kit was working well and I was seriously thinking about buying the kit. I agree with nsxxtreme, if there are issues with the product, the NSX community should be made aware of the problems so that we can make an educated buying decision. Further more, based on the high level of expertise that I have found in this form it may be advantages to share with us the problems being experienced in an effort to help solve them. Just my two cents worth. I for one would love to know more.

 

[KODIAC]

Kendall,

thanks, wasnt sure on the tone of your post, so I always will bow to those that own an X, and i am not out to offend anyone.

I am aware that you moderate the forum, I however, am not a member of the yahoo forum, and cannot post to it, or discuss with other BBSC Betas threw that venue. I tend to discuss via PM. As far as the kit being Production ready, I was always under the assumption that it was beta, and got it a lil cheaper, for deciding to venture that path. For tuning the BBSC, I think it is not that hard to get a desirable a/f. If you would like to, feel free to PM me ([email protected]), and maybe together we can reach a good a/f for you.

Again, just my opinion, and look forward to this kit becoming a standard in performance upgrades.

Mike

 

[KODIAC]

Originally posted by Stephen:
This is the first I have heard that problems exist with the BBSC. I assumed that the kit was working well and I was seriously thinking about buying the kit. I agree with nsxxtreme, if there are issues with the product, the NSX community should be made aware of the problems so that we can make an educated buying decision. Further more, based on the high level of expertise that I have found in this form it may be advantages to share with us the problems being experienced in an effort to help solve them. Just my two cents worth. I for one would love to know more.

The BBSC kit, is going pretty well, IMO. I truely believe in this kit, I have seen a BBSC tuned properly, and it has been very reliable... it was properly tuned pre -xpo, and hasnt been touched since... it is still pulling strong, and safe... it will also be tracked for two days at Road Atlanta on Jan 11-12. Also, at Roebling on the 25-26 of Jan. So far, this setup, has been tuned very well, and has not had any major issues or problems. Some BBSC may be having issues, again it is a Beta, and as such issues may arise, and will be resolved...

 

[kpond]

"I think it is not that hard to get a desirable a/f"

Hahahahahahahahaha. Kodiak, you have no idea. If you really want to educate yourself a bit, you may want to do some searches here and learn more about the level of control that we have with the SS Box and the inherent limitations it presents. (I know I wrote a lot about it here and so did others. I'm not going to start again here.)

 

[KODIAC]

Originally posted by kpond:
"I think it is not that hard to get a desirable a/f"

Hahahahahahahahaha. Kodiak, you have no idea. If you really want to educate yourself a bit, you may want to do some searches here and learn more about the level of control that we have with the SS Box and the inherent limitations it presents. (I know I wrote a lot about it here and so did others. I'm not going to start again here.)

okay kendall,

I aint out to start a debate over tuning the BBSC, but I think that the SS box is adaquate.

To bad your in Cali

, if you were here, I'd take ya out for drinks and we could discuss this at length.

also, outta curiousity, are you using killer? or a different map? i recall you stating about having the FJO, and all the tuning you do with it, just wondering where your map stands now.... I know you were doing mods to the map, and then about 5 to 10 "pulls" on the street for tuning. Havn't heard much about your current setup, and map, but I am interested to know. I try to stay well informed as much as I can about the BBSC kits.

And for all those that know me, and my education level

well wait a minute, strike that.....

ok, time to call it a night, be back in four hours....


Mike


[This message has been edited by KODIAC (edited 24 December 2002).]

 

[MiamieNeSeX]

As for me and most everyone that I know that has the BBSC, we all went into it knowing that it was a a beta kit, therefore requiring testing and tuning and follow up from Mark B., at which he has been excellent in the support. As far as you being unhappy or trashing the kit KPOND, I would unbolt it from your car , I am sure before you get to the last bolt there will be a line of people waiting to buy it from you. If they come out with an upgrade for extra HP or earlier boost gain then I am in. I beleive the extra HP that the BBSC produces was all that this car has needed, for all of those that dont agree then enjoy what you have (220-240) RWHP :eek
Armando



------------------
White 1992
Dali Intake,
Dali Sway Bars,
H & R Springs,
Slotted Rotors,
Comptech Exhaust,
BBSC

 

[Yellow Rose]

A few comments.

Armando - Kendall did not say he is unhappy with his BBSC. The original post on this thread is Novi 1000 vs Novi 2000. However, as human nature often leads, a thread will morph with subsequent posts.

Kendall is correct on the private Yahoo list, in that it has been pretty quiet lately. What question come up are mostly so specific that it may be not of much interest here. Such as, "Hey so-n-so, what value do you have in cell B58 that corresponds to 13.5 V at xyz RPM?" Unlike what some people think is being protected under a shroud of conspiracy, the discussions on Yahoo are few (there are more FI posts here than there) and very specific in nature. Additionally, unlike threads here that often go on an on, the threads on Yahoo are short, to the point and over with.

Kendall - Kodiac has tuned Romeo's aftercooled NSX, the one that makes 425 RWHP. Now granted, it took a lot of work to get Romeo's A-F ratio fairly constant like a Walbro fuel pump and larger injectors, but with time a somewhat constant A-F ratio can be achieved. (Or shall we strive for "zero fuel trim" instead?)

Kodiac - yes, Kendall has an FJO. I rec'd mine yesterday and will plan to install it this weekend.

An observation of A-F ratio readings. At NSXPO, we tuned my SS box to pulse the injectors for an A-F ratio variability (right word?) of 11.8 to 12.2. This was subsequently verified with MB's FJO. This was done with one of the cats replaced with a test pipe with an O2 sensor dedicated to the FJO controller. A few weeks later, I removed the cats and installed test pipes with spare O2 bungs welded into both pipes. The dyno shop's tailpipe sniffer (I had not yet ordered my FJO) was used to measure A-F and it varied from 10.8 to 12.9. The A-F ratio at NSXPO was measured on the street going to redline through fourth gear. The A-F ratio at the dyno shop was measured in a "fourth gear-only" pull. Which is right? I don't know, because two watches never tell the same time. Next dyno session I will compare their A-F ratio to my FJO reading. My bet is riding on the FJO.

Final comments that hopefully will return this thread to the original theme - Novi 1000 vs Novi 2000. Even though the smaller unit can sufficiently provide enough airflow to produce X HP, intuitively the larger unit can do so with less effort. Less effort means longer life. Longer life means less frequent rebuild or replacement. Since both units can produce the same HP, what is the incentive to upgrade? To answer Kendall's original question, there is no incentive if the car already has the smaller unit. However, what if the engine was rebuilt and you are at a fork in the road - Novi 1000 or Novi 2000? For the incremental cost, and my wallet, it was a no-brainer. I selected the Novi 2000 option largely because it potentially offers more tuning flexibility with my aftercooler. Granted this is qualitative speak vs dyno plots vs PSI-RPM plots, but I still feel comfortable with my decision. I think I'll go for a drive.

 

[kpond]

Armando,

My purpose in starting the thread was to increase the awareness around the BBSC principally because my perception was that the info available was decidedly one-sided.

From the "outside" it might appear that this kit had matured and presents a viable option to the only production FI kit available - the Comptech.

Does it mean that no one should buy the BBSC? Nope, but I for one, would have appreciated to know more about the status of the kit before buying it. I mentioned here before that I was led to believe that the kit was a lot more solid than it was. The first drive in the car after delivery produced check engine lights and subsequent testing of the a/f showed a very undesireable rich condition (less than 10.0:1). With time, I was able to learn much more about the SS box and tuning it. We eventually learned some of the reasons that were "guaranteed" to produce CELs. I still cannot imagine to receive a car back from MB where CEL's were guranteed at specific RPM points. I learned right away about the maturity of the kit. Not only that but my car and several others HAD to disconnect the TCS - because the TCS would produce error lights all over the place.

One of the pet-peeves that I have is that there has been ABSOLUTELY NO evolutions of the kit since I bought mine more than 6 months ago. This despite numerous promises and commitments. So, no, instead of supporting the immature status of the original kits and trying to evolve this into something that could potentially be a "bolt-on" contender to Comptech, MB has gone off in various different directions. IMHO, none of these have worked any better than the "base" kit and in most (all?) cases they too have not lived up to their original hype.

So, as I said in starting this thread, my advice is to ask for and satisfy yourself with proof before you leap. Namely,

1. If you're thinking to buy a BBSC kit because you think it is mature - think again. (BTW, I think it is almost a crime and certainly a liability, where the stock NSX harmonic balancer is discarded in the install process.)
2. If you're thinking of throwing more money at an aftercooler - think again.
3. If you're thinking of upgrading from a Novi1000 to a Novi2000 - think again.
4. If you're think to build a low-compression motor so you can have more HP with a BBSC - think again.

Again, I'd like to be wrong about any/all of the above... and I am looking forward to the day when I am - then I'll know my next upgrade!

 

[KODIAC]

Originally posted by AndyVecsey:

Kendall - Kodiac has tuned Romeo's aftercooled NSX, the one that makes 425 RWHP. Now granted, it took a lot of work to get Romeo's A-F ratio fairly constant like a Walbro fuel pump and larger injectors, but with time a somewhat constant A-F ratio can be achieved. (Or shall we strive for "zero fuel trim" instead?)

As for Romeos kit, the 426+ was achieved with the stock fuel pump, and the BBSC 440 injectors. Hopefully we will have some new numbers to compare with. He is getting the Walbro 190lt/hr, changing to 550 injectors, and will be running a 4 rail IC. Just want to make it clear that his 426 was achieved with stock fuel system(2 stage).

An observation of A-F ratio readings. At NSXPO, we tuned my SS box to pulse the injectors for an A-F ratio variability (right word?) of 11.8 to 12.2. This was subsequently verified with MB's FJO. This was done with one of the cats replaced with a test pipe with an O2 sensor dedicated to the FJO controller. A few weeks later, I removed the cats and installed test pipes with spare O2 bungs welded into both pipes. The dyno shop's tailpipe sniffer (I had not yet ordered my FJO) was used to measure A-F and it varied from 10.8 to 12.9. The A-F ratio at NSXPO was measured on the street going to redline through fourth gear. The A-F ratio at the dyno shop was measured in a "fourth gear-only" pull. Which is right? I don't know, because two watches never tell the same time. Next dyno session I will compare their A-F ratio to my FJO reading. My bet is riding on the FJO.

Final comments that hopefully will return this thread to the original theme - Novi 1000 vs Novi 2000. Even though the smaller unit can sufficiently provide enough airflow to produce X HP, intuitively the larger unit can do so with less effort. Less effort means longer life. Longer life means less frequent rebuild or replacement. Since both units can produce the same HP, what is the incentive to upgrade? To answer Kendall's original question, there is no incentive if the car already has the smaller unit. However, what if the engine was rebuilt and you are at a fork in the road - Novi 1000 or Novi 2000? For the incremental cost, and my wallet, it was a no-brainer. I selected the Novi 2000 option largely because it potentially offers more tuning flexibility with my aftercooler. Granted this is qualitative speak vs dyno plots vs PSI-RPM plots, but I still feel comfortable with my decision. I think I'll go for a drive.

Andy, yes that is my point exactly, the 2000 blower can perform the same work as the 1000, but with less effort. Also, with the 2000 anyone low-comp(as you are), can run higher boost levels with a variable blow off, and vent the extra boost not needed to have the boost come on quicker.

Also, I am curious as to where your map stands, I know that you have gone under extensive tuning with the FJO and MB. Just wondering where your fuel and timing stands. I know you have the water-to-air cooler, and low-comp. So was wondering where your map sits. I try to stay well informed about the BBSC. Looking and comparing as much data as I can get my hands on.

Andy, Enjoy your ride...
It's all damp, muggy, and blah here in ATL

so it sucks.

Happy Holidays to all


[This message has been edited by KODIAC (edited 24 December 2002).]

 

[4AU4LIFE]

I must give my .02 in to this conversation now after reading all these posts.

I have personnally met and allowed Kodiac to oversee the dynoing and tuning of my BBSC'd NSX in September. Along with Charles (SC) and Romeo there with us. For as short a time frame as this kit has been around he is one of the most knowledgable people with the program out there IMO. I'm sure there are others that know it well also but he isn't speaking out of his a** when he talks. If you don't think so, just sit down with him for a little while and discuss it.
When my car was dynoed, it kept flashing the same code as everyone else is/was getting. Since I'm running stock everything and had the Home Depot intake system I wasn't getting the power I would've hoped for. They (Mike, Romeo, Charles) all helped that day to get me some more HP and straighten out the A/F curve. If I'm not mistaken I am lucky enough to have one of the best curves of any BBSC car running stock. I would be happy to try and post dyno sheet for all to see. Granted the HP and torque aren't up there yet but with a couple of minor bolt on mods, it will be.


------------------
ALL NSX
92 RED/BLACK 5-SPEED

 

[D'Ecosse]

Originally posted by MiamieNeSeX:
As for me and most everyone that I know that has the BBSC, we all went into it knowing that it was a a beta kit, therefore requiring testing and tuning and follow up from Mark B., at which he has been excellent in the support. As far as you being unhappy or trashing the kit KPOND, I would unbolt it from your car , I am sure before you get to the last bolt there will be a line of people waiting to buy it from you. If they come out with an upgrade for extra HP or earlier boost gain then I am in. I beleive the extra HP that the BBSC produces was all that this car has needed, for all of those that dont agree then enjoy what you have (220-240) RWHP :eek
Armando

So, you've had yours for, what, all of 2 weeks now? Bought used, too? I don't see how 2 weeks "experience" compares with those who have been down the road much longer offering their obviously extensive knowledge of the product.
You have also already listed your Novi 1000 for sale to install a 2000 - http://www.nsxprime.com/ubb/Forum18/HTML/001054.html

what have YOU based your decision on?

As far as being a BETA product at this point, there is NOTHING (I could find) in the sales jargon on SOS, one of the 2 authorized vendors, to caution against this http://www.scienceofspeed.com/products/engine_performance_products/NSX/BaschBoost/

I quote from the Q & A on SOS re BBSC:
Q: How does the BaschBoost Supercharger manage fuel to the engine?
A: The BaschBoost Supercharger uses a proprietary electronic fuel management system to ensure that the engine is supplied sufficient fuel with the added boost from the supercharger. Unlike mechanical fuel management systems utilized by other products, the electronic fuel system utlized by the BBSC offers a reliable and high performance solution to fuel management.

That hardly suggests BETA & certainly doesn't recognize the comments observed by most.
Dali's site does declare it is a BETA, expected to be over in "November"

To be fair, I have less personal experience of the BBSC than MiamiNeSeX, not owning one at all (Not owning one I believe relieves me of any bias): I have driven and am familiar with the car previously equipped with his & was not terribly impressed; there are several serious shortcomings to the design, as pointed out, primarily in the A/F control; the removal of harmonic balancer is incredible; the drive-shaft pulley is really weak design, not even keyed, prone to slipping unless seriously torqued down; over-tension required on the belt for same reason (let's see how long alternator lasts).
It may make peak HP numbers but in the mid-range is nothing impressive. The higher boost Comptech conversely felt much stronger.
When I'm ready, I'll be going turbo!




[This message has been edited by D'Ecosse (edited 24 December 2002).]

 

[Yellow Rose]

Originally posted by D'Ecosse:
...the drive-shaft pulley is really weak design, not even keyed, prone to slipping unless seriously torqued down; over-tension required on the belt for same reason (let's see how long alternator lasts).

Incorrect. The shaft is a precision component manufactured by Thomson, with lateral deflection to within 0.00001". (Yes, one ten-thousandths of an inch.) It is not keyed; however, the male end is shaped with six sides. The hole in the drive pulley is broached so it fits over the matched shape of the shaft. In fact, from a power transmission perspective, this configuration is stronger than simply cutting a keyway into the shaft. Much stronger.



[This message has been edited by AndyVecsey (edited 24 December 2002).]