supercharger
Mach 1 Member
Joined: December 19, 2004
Posts: 618
Likes: 0
Originally posted by Error404@December 3, 2005, 8:36 PM
does anyone here have a whipple? Or know of anyone who has one? That is, on an 05 or 06. The torque and HP curve really impressed me on whipples website, it's not "peek power", it's "power under the curve", and a lot of it all the way through the RPM. Torque that is anyway
does anyone here have a whipple? Or know of anyone who has one? That is, on an 05 or 06. The torque and HP curve really impressed me on whipples website, it's not "peek power", it's "power under the curve", and a lot of it all the way through the RPM. Torque that is anyway
In short...NO. Whipple has been delaying since they first posted their S/C on their site. From the info they posted it looks awesome. They ran into a supply problem which eventually caused Ford to change the Shelby back to an Eaton blower. Supposedly they should be shipping units next month and are planning a Super Performance Pack to be sold through FRPP in the Spring. We'll see.....
Mach 1 Member
Joined: December 19, 2004
Posts: 618
Likes: 0
Just as an update: Whipple just updated thier site with some new graphics and info, for anyone that is interested. Bad news though, they pushed the production date back, yet again, to 01 FEB 06! Good news.... the 8# non intercooled kit (422rwhp) comes in at less than $5k!
Former Vendor
Joined: January 13, 2006
Posts: 1,030
Likes: 0
Given equivalent vehicles, the turbo would easily motor away from the centrifugal in an acceleration contest......The turbo offered massive midrange torque production, the only system to exceed 600 lb-ft. Need more convincing? At 4,000 rpm, the turbo was more than 100 lb-ft. stronger than either the Roots or centrifugal." - Battle of the Boost, Hotrod Magazine, August 2003.
Former Vendor
Joined: January 13, 2006
Posts: 1,030
Likes: 0
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(traffic142 @ November 25, 2005, 5:35 PM) Quoted post</div><div class='quotemain'>
Well, this discussion is all over the map. I still have a few questions:
I like the idea of the vortex/paxton...no real boost till you want it (hard throttle use), but don't want the ice bit....how much does not having it cause you a problem.
The roots blower is nice, but I really don't think I will need the power 24/7. gas milage is kind of nice.
If shelby, saleen, roush are using a roots type, should we not follow suit. Maybe they know a little bit about what is best for the 4.6L
Will Ford offer a S/C for us with out voiding our warranty?
[/b][/quote]
I agree this discussion is all over the board and for the average Joe that is looking for a winner...I don't think they are going to find it here. You what they say about opinions, they are like eyeballs (cleaned it up) everyone has them. I re-read 90% of this entire post and I must admit it has changed direction and focus. Several have come back and edited opinions and it through me off at first. I wanted to answer this post specifically because it touches on a good point.
WHY DID THE FACTORIES STOP THE TURBO THING AND JUMP ON THE POSITIVE DISPLACEMENT BAND WAGAN?
AND WHY NOT THE CENTRIFUGALS?
Here is the answer... While again I will preface this by saying it is opinion, "in my opinion" it is not opinion it is FACT.
1. Turbochargers offer the most longevity. Simply put the factory could put a turbo on the engine and not fear it would fail within the warranty time frame.
2. Turbochargers offered the most empirical data. That means the turbo was around for so long the factories knew there track record.
3. By the mid 80’s Chrysler had so much trouble with their little turbo 2.4 engines it literally changed the face of the way engines were going to be built for factory offerings.
4. Not only were the turbos failing left and right on the little Chryslers but more importantly they were causing premature catalytic converter failure. When and engine fails the factory fixes it but when the cats go out – Uncle Sam jumps in. The EPA and CARB mounted a fierce attack on Chrysler and then turned their attention on other manufactures with turbos. They were using the turbos to make the weak feeble engines powerful enough to get consumers to by the cars. They were never trying to make race cars out of them.
Ok so here is where it all took a turn for the worse. The EPA came in and said all catalytic converters need to last 10 years or 100,000 miles regardless of manufactures engine warranty. The EPA raised the standard for the emission output an engine could produce from the tailpipe. (By raise the standard I mean they said less bad stuff could come out). At the time the catalytic converter companies said “we can’t make a converter that will withstand the temps created by the turbos. Meaning they could not meet the 10 year/100,000 mile plan.
GM and Ford had ties to EATON and Eaton was also involved in the catalytic converter manufacturing so they all got together to solve the issue leave Chrysler out in the wind. GM and Eaton developed the supercharged 3.8 that now power millions of Buicks, Oldsmobiles and Chevys. Ford turned to Mazda and Yamaha. Ford now owns Mazda and Yamaha developed the SHO motor that ended up in the Taurus. Ultimately Ford purchased a portion of Eaton and started to play ball with them as well.
While all this was going on catalytic converter technology was still being developed and today a turbo would be no problem for the Cats. However, now that most of the American Manufactures are back on Positive displacement band wagon they can’t just slam on the breaks and go back to turbos
5. Also turbos do present an exhaust routing issue for the factory when servicing the cars.
6. Centrifugals were looked at as well by the factories but they presented 2 problems. They had no track record to speak of so they were not sure if they could go 100,000 miles and they were harder to package in the engine compartment because rather then going up the parts mounted forward.
The factories loved the Paxton and Vortech product because it was not as hard on engine parts down low as the positive displacement product but the other factors out weight the benefit to lower boost at lower RPMs so the centrifugal was parked
Then just as turbos started to come back the EPA came in and created no laws as they relate to exhaust systems. That meant single turbo V8 engines could no longer fit the criteria and twin turbo kits are costly. Again a blow to the turbo and a positive for the Positive displacement based on the OE
So the question is why do Saleen and Roush use the Twin screw type blowers. It is not because they make better power; it is because they cost less to sell then to produce a complete twin turbo system and the package very easy so the dealerships can work on them. As I said before, the centrifugals make it harder to work on the engine like water pumps and alternator changes then the Roots
I gotta run - this is about half the story
Well, this discussion is all over the map. I still have a few questions:
I like the idea of the vortex/paxton...no real boost till you want it (hard throttle use), but don't want the ice bit....how much does not having it cause you a problem.
The roots blower is nice, but I really don't think I will need the power 24/7. gas milage is kind of nice.
If shelby, saleen, roush are using a roots type, should we not follow suit. Maybe they know a little bit about what is best for the 4.6L
Will Ford offer a S/C for us with out voiding our warranty?
[/b][/quote]
I agree this discussion is all over the board and for the average Joe that is looking for a winner...I don't think they are going to find it here. You what they say about opinions, they are like eyeballs (cleaned it up) everyone has them. I re-read 90% of this entire post and I must admit it has changed direction and focus. Several have come back and edited opinions and it through me off at first. I wanted to answer this post specifically because it touches on a good point.
WHY DID THE FACTORIES STOP THE TURBO THING AND JUMP ON THE POSITIVE DISPLACEMENT BAND WAGAN?
AND WHY NOT THE CENTRIFUGALS?
Here is the answer... While again I will preface this by saying it is opinion, "in my opinion" it is not opinion it is FACT.
1. Turbochargers offer the most longevity. Simply put the factory could put a turbo on the engine and not fear it would fail within the warranty time frame.
2. Turbochargers offered the most empirical data. That means the turbo was around for so long the factories knew there track record.
3. By the mid 80’s Chrysler had so much trouble with their little turbo 2.4 engines it literally changed the face of the way engines were going to be built for factory offerings.
4. Not only were the turbos failing left and right on the little Chryslers but more importantly they were causing premature catalytic converter failure. When and engine fails the factory fixes it but when the cats go out – Uncle Sam jumps in. The EPA and CARB mounted a fierce attack on Chrysler and then turned their attention on other manufactures with turbos. They were using the turbos to make the weak feeble engines powerful enough to get consumers to by the cars. They were never trying to make race cars out of them.
Ok so here is where it all took a turn for the worse. The EPA came in and said all catalytic converters need to last 10 years or 100,000 miles regardless of manufactures engine warranty. The EPA raised the standard for the emission output an engine could produce from the tailpipe. (By raise the standard I mean they said less bad stuff could come out). At the time the catalytic converter companies said “we can’t make a converter that will withstand the temps created by the turbos. Meaning they could not meet the 10 year/100,000 mile plan.
GM and Ford had ties to EATON and Eaton was also involved in the catalytic converter manufacturing so they all got together to solve the issue leave Chrysler out in the wind. GM and Eaton developed the supercharged 3.8 that now power millions of Buicks, Oldsmobiles and Chevys. Ford turned to Mazda and Yamaha. Ford now owns Mazda and Yamaha developed the SHO motor that ended up in the Taurus. Ultimately Ford purchased a portion of Eaton and started to play ball with them as well.
While all this was going on catalytic converter technology was still being developed and today a turbo would be no problem for the Cats. However, now that most of the American Manufactures are back on Positive displacement band wagon they can’t just slam on the breaks and go back to turbos
5. Also turbos do present an exhaust routing issue for the factory when servicing the cars.
6. Centrifugals were looked at as well by the factories but they presented 2 problems. They had no track record to speak of so they were not sure if they could go 100,000 miles and they were harder to package in the engine compartment because rather then going up the parts mounted forward.
The factories loved the Paxton and Vortech product because it was not as hard on engine parts down low as the positive displacement product but the other factors out weight the benefit to lower boost at lower RPMs so the centrifugal was parked
Then just as turbos started to come back the EPA came in and created no laws as they relate to exhaust systems. That meant single turbo V8 engines could no longer fit the criteria and twin turbo kits are costly. Again a blow to the turbo and a positive for the Positive displacement based on the OE
So the question is why do Saleen and Roush use the Twin screw type blowers. It is not because they make better power; it is because they cost less to sell then to produce a complete twin turbo system and the package very easy so the dealerships can work on them. As I said before, the centrifugals make it harder to work on the engine like water pumps and alternator changes then the Roots
I gotta run - this is about half the story
Mach 1 Member
Joined: December 14, 2004
Posts: 658
Likes: 0
my HP turbo kit is still being tested, but so far the stage 1 kit (stage 2 to follow by monday) made 375rwhp (aprox 430 fwhp) at 4# of boost on a 60mm, thats with stock exhaust with no cats and a snow performance methenal injection kit(i am not sure if the methanol was used for the dyno). Today or monday they will test with the boost-a-pump cause the fuel pressure wasn't high enough and they hope to get a little more out of 4#'s of boost. Then by Monday as well the 39# injectors will be installed and the boost will be brough up to 7-8# and we are expecting 475rwhp(aprox. 545fwhp)
Mach 1 Member
Joined: August 7, 2005
Posts: 747
Likes: 0
Last time I posted in this thread was a long time ago, since then I have bought and installed a Saleen Series VI and now have "eyeballs" about FI...[img]style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/smile.gif[/img]
No doubt a properly setup turbo is "better." They are more efficient, and have tons more power potential.
But now let me ask you this...are you a professional drag racer? Are you even an amateur drag racer? I'm not, I'm just a dude who drives his Mustang to work everyday. There is absolutely no need (for me) for the added cost, complexity and power of a turbo.
I have no doubt my Saleen unit is capable of hitting 600 rwhp. It's probably capable of doing more even. Will I ever see those numbers? Probably not. So the cheaper, simpler solution is fine for me.
Let me give you an idea of how much cheaper. I got mine for $4300. I bought a 90 mm MAF for $100, used 39 lb Cobra injectors for $100, rigged my stock intake snorkel to use the 90 mm MAF and an S&B conical filter ($100). Then I (a complete novice) installed everything myself with the help of a mechanically inclined buddy, loaded a mail order JDM tune (one tune $75), and bam...I was up and running (perfectly btw, 11.5 - 12.0 AF). I *seriously* doubt you could do that with a turbo.
About it "always being on." The boost only finds its way into combustion chamber when you are accelerating (hard). Cruising or light acceleration should have the bypass valve (almost?) completely open.
No doubt a properly setup turbo is "better." They are more efficient, and have tons more power potential.
But now let me ask you this...are you a professional drag racer? Are you even an amateur drag racer? I'm not, I'm just a dude who drives his Mustang to work everyday. There is absolutely no need (for me) for the added cost, complexity and power of a turbo.
I have no doubt my Saleen unit is capable of hitting 600 rwhp. It's probably capable of doing more even. Will I ever see those numbers? Probably not. So the cheaper, simpler solution is fine for me.
Let me give you an idea of how much cheaper. I got mine for $4300. I bought a 90 mm MAF for $100, used 39 lb Cobra injectors for $100, rigged my stock intake snorkel to use the 90 mm MAF and an S&B conical filter ($100). Then I (a complete novice) installed everything myself with the help of a mechanically inclined buddy, loaded a mail order JDM tune (one tune $75), and bam...I was up and running (perfectly btw, 11.5 - 12.0 AF). I *seriously* doubt you could do that with a turbo.
About it "always being on." The boost only finds its way into combustion chamber when you are accelerating (hard). Cruising or light acceleration should have the bypass valve (almost?) completely open.
Mach 1 Member
Joined: June 24, 2004
Posts: 985
Likes: 0
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(clockworks @ March 1, 2006, 12:06 PM) Quoted post</div><div class='quotemain'>
Let me give you an idea of how much cheaper. I got mine for $4300.
[/b][/quote]
How did you find one for $4300? I can't seem to find them for under $5K.
Let me give you an idea of how much cheaper. I got mine for $4300.
[/b][/quote]
How did you find one for $4300? I can't seem to find them for under $5K.
He got his before the Jan 1, 2006 price increase...
Mach 1 Member
Joined: June 24, 2004
Posts: 985
Likes: 0
I thought that prices were supposed to come DOWN as competition increased? [img]style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/dunno.gif[/img]
Guess I'm not suprised with Saleen tho, they raised the price on their shifter shortly after I bought it. Still 14% is a freakin' hug jump in price.
Guess I'm not suprised with Saleen tho, they raised the price on their shifter shortly after I bought it. Still 14% is a freakin' hug jump in price.
Mach 1 Member
Joined: August 7, 2005
Posts: 747
Likes: 0
Also, you have to call. Saleen won't let vendors list it for less than what the Saleen site lists it at, but they ARE allowed to SELL it for less. At least that what I was told when I called for a price and it happened to be $700 less than the price listed on the website.
Kinda funny, the place that I bought mine from made a mistake. They left their invoice from Saleen in my box. Yall won't believe how cheap vendors get them for...
Kinda funny, the place that I bought mine from made a mistake. They left their invoice from Saleen in my box. Yall won't believe how cheap vendors get them for...
Member
Joined: February 5, 2006
Posts: 10
Likes: 0
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(clockworks @ March 1, 2006, 2:03 PM) Quoted post</div><div class='quotemain'>
Also, you have to call. Saleen won't let vendors list it for less than what the Saleen site lists it at, but they ARE allowed to SELL it for less. At least that what I was told when I called for a price and it happened to be $700 less than the price listed on the website.
Kinda funny, the place that I bought mine from made a mistake. They left their invoice from Saleen in my box. Yall won't believe how cheap vendors get them for...
[/b][/quote]
I'm just curious why no one is mentioning the Roush set up. I know it's a little pricy at $5700 but it does offer a warranty on the powertrian that I believe no one else does. Is the Roush an inferior set up? I hope not, I just purchased it and it's being installed as I write this.
Also, you have to call. Saleen won't let vendors list it for less than what the Saleen site lists it at, but they ARE allowed to SELL it for less. At least that what I was told when I called for a price and it happened to be $700 less than the price listed on the website.
Kinda funny, the place that I bought mine from made a mistake. They left their invoice from Saleen in my box. Yall won't believe how cheap vendors get them for...
[/b][/quote]
I'm just curious why no one is mentioning the Roush set up. I know it's a little pricy at $5700 but it does offer a warranty on the powertrian that I believe no one else does. Is the Roush an inferior set up? I hope not, I just purchased it and it's being installed as I write this.
Bullitt Member
Joined: August 30, 2005
Posts: 321
Likes: 0
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(greg @ March 1, 2006, 3:55 PM) Quoted post</div><div class='quotemain'>
I'm just curious why no one is mentioning the Roush set up. I know it's a little pricy at $5700 but it does offer a warranty on the powertrian that I believe no one else does. Is the Roush an inferior set up? I hope not, I just purchased it and it's being installed as I write this.
[/b][/quote]
The Roush system probably has the least power making potential of all of the current supercharger offerings, but in my opinion is also one of the best engineered. If you want to make real high hp eventually (beyond the limits of the stock shortblock) then any of the other superchargers is a better choice. If you want to add ~115 hp (flywheel) and keep your stock shortblock intact then Roush is the way to go. I really like the Roush and plan to purchase one in the near future, but I can understand why many shy away from this system and seek bigger and more powerful superchargers.
I'm just curious why no one is mentioning the Roush set up. I know it's a little pricy at $5700 but it does offer a warranty on the powertrian that I believe no one else does. Is the Roush an inferior set up? I hope not, I just purchased it and it's being installed as I write this.
[/b][/quote]
The Roush system probably has the least power making potential of all of the current supercharger offerings, but in my opinion is also one of the best engineered. If you want to make real high hp eventually (beyond the limits of the stock shortblock) then any of the other superchargers is a better choice. If you want to add ~115 hp (flywheel) and keep your stock shortblock intact then Roush is the way to go. I really like the Roush and plan to purchase one in the near future, but I can understand why many shy away from this system and seek bigger and more powerful superchargers.
Mach 1 Member
Joined: December 14, 2004
Posts: 658
Likes: 0
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(clockworks @ March 1, 2006, 11:06 AM) Quoted post</div><div class='quotemain'>
I have no doubt my Saleen unit is capable of hitting 600 rwhp. It's probably capable of doing more even. Will I ever see those numbers? Probably not. So the cheaper, simpler solution is fine for me.
Let me give you an idea of how much cheaper. I got mine for $4300. I bought a 90 mm MAF for $100, used 39 lb Cobra injectors for $100, rigged my stock intake snorkel to use the 90 mm MAF and an S&B conical filter ($100). Then I (a complete novice) installed everything myself with the help of a mechanically inclined buddy, loaded a mail order JDM tune (one tune $75), and bam...I was up and running (perfectly btw, 11.5 - 12.0 AF). I *seriously* doubt you could do that with a turbo.
[/b][/quote]
#1 I have serious doubts that your saleen will make 600 hp as i dont think that is possible without 110 octain gas(running 20#'s of boost) and one other little thing.... a built motor!
#2 My turbo system including install cost $0.00 I win!
#3 Just poking fun, I agree that for 99% of the people here it doesn't make any difference what they get as they are not turning there cars into race cars and for street use 400-500 hp is alot and all the systems can deliever that
I have no doubt my Saleen unit is capable of hitting 600 rwhp. It's probably capable of doing more even. Will I ever see those numbers? Probably not. So the cheaper, simpler solution is fine for me.
Let me give you an idea of how much cheaper. I got mine for $4300. I bought a 90 mm MAF for $100, used 39 lb Cobra injectors for $100, rigged my stock intake snorkel to use the 90 mm MAF and an S&B conical filter ($100). Then I (a complete novice) installed everything myself with the help of a mechanically inclined buddy, loaded a mail order JDM tune (one tune $75), and bam...I was up and running (perfectly btw, 11.5 - 12.0 AF). I *seriously* doubt you could do that with a turbo.
[/b][/quote]
#1 I have serious doubts that your saleen will make 600 hp as i dont think that is possible without 110 octain gas(running 20#'s of boost) and one other little thing.... a built motor!
#2 My turbo system including install cost $0.00 I win!
#3 Just poking fun, I agree that for 99% of the people here it doesn't make any difference what they get as they are not turning there cars into race cars and for street use 400-500 hp is alot and all the systems can deliever that
Mach 1 Member
Joined: June 24, 2004
Posts: 985
Likes: 0
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(greg @ March 1, 2006, 4:55 PM) Quoted post</div><div class='quotemain'>
I'm just curious why no one is mentioning the Roush set up. I know it's a little pricy at $5700 but it does offer a warranty on the powertrian that I believe no one else does. Is the Roush an inferior set up? I hope not, I just purchased it and it's being installed as I write this.
[/b][/quote]
While I wish that I could buy a supercharger which kept my warranty intact, the Roush is a Roots type SC and those are the most inefficient type.
I'm just curious why no one is mentioning the Roush set up. I know it's a little pricy at $5700 but it does offer a warranty on the powertrian that I believe no one else does. Is the Roush an inferior set up? I hope not, I just purchased it and it's being installed as I write this.
[/b][/quote]
While I wish that I could buy a supercharger which kept my warranty intact, the Roush is a Roots type SC and those are the most inefficient type.
Member
Joined: March 24, 2005
Posts: 13
Likes: 0
From: Kemah, Texas
I have the Vortech on my ’06 and have been really pleased with it’s performance. I had a Kenne Bell on my other mustang a ’95 model GT. The Vortech seems to be more manageable under full throttle. I would imagine that it is because of Vortech’s progressive boost as apposed to Kenne Bell’s all in boost. I like them both for different reasons.
Former Vendor
Joined: January 13, 2006
Posts: 1,030
Likes: 0
I just can't understand why all you guys keep saying turbochargers are for drag racing only. That is just crazy. You can't look at 20-year-old data and say "X". Heck you can't look at 5-year-old data. Our single turbo kit for the 2005/06 Mustang will make boost virtually instantaneously. The kit comes with a 76mm turbo so there is plenty of room to grow (if you want more power later).
A 60mm turbo would have “spooled” even faster but then down the road if you guys decide to step it up more it wreaks havoc on fitment.
In short, no one seems to really be pushing the centrifugal here and the Positive Displacement blowers seem to be getting a lot of chatter so I am going to wave the flag for the Centrifugal one more time and say a centrifugal should produce better mileage at cruise then the PD style blower and make more power. As for seat of the pans I agree the PD style will feel a little more snappy for the for 60 feet but after that they are close in the middle and the centrifugal will walk away at top.
More Mustang drag races have been won by centrifugal blower then turbos in the last 10 years so why not call the centrifugal the race only part – I just makes no sense
A 60mm turbo would have “spooled” even faster but then down the road if you guys decide to step it up more it wreaks havoc on fitment.
In short, no one seems to really be pushing the centrifugal here and the Positive Displacement blowers seem to be getting a lot of chatter so I am going to wave the flag for the Centrifugal one more time and say a centrifugal should produce better mileage at cruise then the PD style blower and make more power. As for seat of the pans I agree the PD style will feel a little more snappy for the for 60 feet but after that they are close in the middle and the centrifugal will walk away at top.
More Mustang drag races have been won by centrifugal blower then turbos in the last 10 years so why not call the centrifugal the race only part – I just makes no sense
9 is not my lucky number.
Joined: March 12, 2004
Posts: 3,663
Likes: 1
JR I think people are scared of centrifugal blowers (Procharger) because they seem to be grenading motors a lot more in these cars. I think the running total at Modular Fords is 6 Procharger grenades. Now that data might be skewed because more people bought Prochargers early on. I think now we've seen every type of blower grenade a stock 3V so far (Procharger, Saleen, Kenne Bell, not sure about Vortech or Roush).
Mach 1 Member
Joined: August 7, 2005
Posts: 747
Likes: 0
It's not for drag racing only. It is just my opinion that the
* added cost
* added complexity
* added power
is not necessary of me, who isn't more serious about drag racing. That's all. I'm just saying it's a bit overkill for my drive to work. The low cost, easy of installation, and easy maintainability of a twin screw is perfect for me.
I think it's awesome that you offering this turbo kit though. The more choices the better. No doubt if I had the money, and my car was more race oriented, I would definitely go turbo! It has no equal in terms of power an efficiency.
* added cost
* added complexity
* added power
is not necessary of me, who isn't more serious about drag racing. That's all. I'm just saying it's a bit overkill for my drive to work. The low cost, easy of installation, and easy maintainability of a twin screw is perfect for me.
I think it's awesome that you offering this turbo kit though. The more choices the better. No doubt if I had the money, and my car was more race oriented, I would definitely go turbo! It has no equal in terms of power an efficiency.
Mach 1 Member
Joined: August 7, 2005
Posts: 747
Likes: 0
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(dustindu4 @ March 2, 2006, 9:57 AM) Quoted post</div><div class='quotemain'>
JR I think people are scared of centrifugal blowers (Procharger) because they seem to be grenading motors a lot more in these cars. I think the running total at Modular Fords is 6 Procharger grenades. Now that data might be skewed because more people bought Prochargers early on. I think now we've seen every type of blower grenade a stock 3V so far (Procharger, Saleen, Kenne Bell, not sure about Vortech or Roush).
[/b][/quote]
Word, Procharger's track record on the net with 05's is less than reassuring. Even if it was the owners' fault each time, I'm all about peace of mind...
The Saleen grenade was 3rd hand knowledge and Don's letting go with the Kenne Bell was a "fluke" imo.
JR I think people are scared of centrifugal blowers (Procharger) because they seem to be grenading motors a lot more in these cars. I think the running total at Modular Fords is 6 Procharger grenades. Now that data might be skewed because more people bought Prochargers early on. I think now we've seen every type of blower grenade a stock 3V so far (Procharger, Saleen, Kenne Bell, not sure about Vortech or Roush).
[/b][/quote]
Word, Procharger's track record on the net with 05's is less than reassuring. Even if it was the owners' fault each time, I'm all about peace of mind...
The Saleen grenade was 3rd hand knowledge and Don's letting go with the Kenne Bell was a "fluke" imo.