Thomas S

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(rygenstormlocke @ April 19, 2006, 4:53 PM) Quoted post</div><div class='quotemain'>
Looks like we lost data on this one from the crash. Hey Jimp/LX, the copy on the collective is up to date. Would you mind pulling the info from there and updating this one as well?
[/b][/quote]

Done deal. [img]style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/thumb.gif[/img]

rygenstormlocke

Bump!

Don't we need to update this with Afixers EE numbers?

Thomas S

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(rygenstormlocke @ May 3, 2006, 4:16 PM) Quoted post</div><div class='quotemain'>
Bump!

Don't we need to update this with Afixers EE numbers?
[/b][/quote]

Ok, I added them. 248/262 right?

MSP

If your gonna use FlapJacks numbers using an 11psi pulley, and claiming 9psi and 321RWHP, then you must use my numbers with my 11psi pulley @ 9psi showing 330RWHP and 326RWTQ..

I have a dyno sheet. Just ask..

We both spun the 11psi pulleys to 5500rpm.. He was at 320RWHP and I was at 330RWHP.. Lets keep the thread honest... No bias in an official thread..

Thomas S

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(MSP @ May 3, 2006, 5:13 PM) Quoted post</div><div class='quotemain'>
If your gonna use FlapJacks numbers using an 11psi pulley, and claiming 9psi and 321RWHP, then you must use my numbers with my 11psi pulley @ 9psi showing 330RWHP and 326RWTQ..

I have a dyno sheet. Just ask..

We both spun the 11psi pulleys to 5500rpm.. He was at 320RWHP and I was at 330RWHP.. Lets keep the thread honest... No bias in an official thread..
[/b][/quote]

Not trying to show any bias. He said he could only run at 9PSI because of the air where he lives. Tell me how you want me to write it. I'm trying to be as fair as possible.

MSP

You can just simply showcase mine at 9psi @ 5500rpm 330RWHP and 326RWTQ..

If you need a link to post I will create one.. Wait.. Let me get you a link.. I know your trying to be honest Jimp...

I just noticed this today! I would have metioned it a long time ago.. No wonder everyone is confused what they should be looking at..

Here is the Link to the dyno sheet.. Please insert it next to Vortech.. Thanks Jimp!!



Also please specify the A/F was @ 10.5 as in the graph, and FlapJacks @ 12.2 A/F.. This is very important information for people to know..

MSP

I cant believe you allowed this to be posted for so long Jimp! I am shocked this info has been in place like this for so long..

Please correct the record as soon as you can, so people are not mis-informed about the facts.. I am blown away by this in-justice.. [img]style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/icon24.gif[/img]

MSP

Because the 3.25 pulley and the 2.87in pulley are different pulleys.. The 2.87in pulley builds boost alot quicker in the rpm band..

For example..


3.25in pulley @ 4000RPM = Impeller Speed(26584.62) Boost= (6.66psi)

2.87in Pulley @ 4000RPM= Impeller Speed(30104.53rpm) Boost=(7.55psi)


3.25in pulley @ 5500RPM = Impeller Speed(36553.85rpm) Boost= (9.16psi )

2.87in Pulley @ 5500RPM= Impeller Speed(41393.73rpm) Boost=(10.38psi)


Now, it is not your job to discriminate on the Superchager curve and pulley design.. However, you must use the engine RPM to distinguish how much work the engine is doing.. Which means, if the Procharger is only at 9psi @ 5500RPM using an 11psi pulley, thats not my problem..

The Vortech creates 1.38psi of boost more than the Procharger using the same amount of work from the engine..

So you must post the results for both systems using the same rated pulley boost size which is 11psi.. Its not my fault or the fault of Vortech the V2 is more efficient at creating boost over the Procharger PS1C.. These are the facts.. We can only go by the facts in official threads.. Thanks Jimp!

WorkInProgress

OK I'm not very car smart and I'm going to beg someone (singular or plural) to break down a simple question with a not so simple answer.

Say that money were no object (within reason). How would you personally build the "ulitmate" street legal V6? I'm probably going to buy a little shoebox that get 40 MPG and save my real car for weekends. But, I would like to be able to drive it around town without getting into trouble. So, street legal is a must. And, even though I'm not a racer, I'm a power junkie so HP and torque is what I'm looking for, even if it leads to lower mileage. So far, I really haven't done anything to the car except dual exhaust and a little bit of exterior work (tint, 18" wheels).

If this is an inappropriate place to post this I apologize. Didn't think I should start a new thread over something as hypothetical as this. PM's are fine and appreciated, but if you think others might benefit as well, please share with the class.

rygenstormlocke

EDIT

A built motor with a power adder. Fazm has some ideas on this, and we have hashed out built motor threads multiple times. Just use the search function.

Rampant

Sorry, but I have to ask -- why start with a V6? If money were no object (within reason), the $5k for forced induction could be speant to get similar power from a GT and a much greater potential for future power.

But, sticking with the V6......
As far as being street legal, you will have a difficult with turbos if you live in CA, since not many (if any) are CARB approved. So, you will probably have to go the supercharger route. Beef up the internals and crank up the boost. Simple as that.

The tricky part is finding a good shop to do it properly.

WorkInProgress

The "money is no object part" came AFTER I had bought the V6. I guess I could upgrade to a GT, but I cringe at paying $29k for a GT after paying off my V6. I'd be looking at around $40k total just for the car.

And, BTW, I live in Texas so emission control laws won't come into play.

MSP

Someday you will learn that a curve makes no difference in the 1/4 mile.. I'm surprised you insist on forcing the conclusion that the turbo is better..

If a Centri supercharger can run a 2005 V6 to 11 sec 1/4 mile, and a Turbo can also run a 2005 V6 to an 11 sec 1/4mile, how do you come to the conclusion that the Turbo is the best case?

I'm not saying it isnt.. However, your approach is such that you believe the turbo in our cars is the dominant, but yet its still unproven..

The concept of the turbo is great.. However the centri concept is also great..

How can you and I avoid conflict, if you insist on the perspective that what you have must be the best out there.. Scrming has been placed on the team and removed from the hit list.. Why must you force me to focus every ounce of my being on you and EX13? Why Rygen? Dont do this, please stay impartial..

It is said that absolute boost, corrupts absolutley.. It appears you have been corrupted..

Please dont force me to bring you to justice.. I will Rygen!

rygenstormlocke

MSP,

I see where you do have one valid point in all of this, but in respect for this thread which I refer people to a lot, I have placed my response here for you to constructively respond to.

http://forums.bradbarnett.net/showth...419#post670419

Regards,

rygenstormlocke

Hey Jimp, got some official numbers for this thread.

ET: 12.8
11PSI (at 10.3lbs of boost:
330RWHP on a mustang dyno
371RWTQ on a mustang dyno