(named: ) turbo/super

[pchandyman@intrex.net (Noah)]

> 1) Superchargers are easier to deal with and support
> as a manufacturer. I would argue that Neuspeed or
> Jackson racing has far fewer "customer complaint"
> (what I might call "customer stupidity") issues than
> Greddy. The fact that boost levels are not directly
> related to crankshaft speed creates a LOT of issues
> that the average person can't deal with and tune for
> properly. Wastegates, fueling, timing, etc. are all
> more difficult to manage when you cannot directly tie
> air consumption to engine speed. Couple that with the
> millions of stupid people out there, and you see why
> there are relatively few mass-produced turbo kits.

    I read all that as saying "Supercharger kits are more proprietary and
thus pretuned to certain boost levels, therefore easier to set up but less
flexible." That is not really something I am in favor of.

    As far as using a G-lader based supercharger setup transplanted from a
corrado, I would urge you to reconsider. The G-lader is just not reliable
enough. With stock boost levels it doesnt make good hp and if you go much
over stock you are asking for trouble. As for the alternatives, the horror
story I referred to was a Lysholm (sp?) kit for the corrado. This thing is
totally underwelming powerwise, and the bearings in it are SO loud they can
be heard above the engine.

>
> 2) The reason I personally am going with a
> supercharger is due to the intended purpose of my
> vehicle: autocrossing. The nature of autocrossing
> means that instantaneous throttle response and a
> linear torque curve are FAR more important than
> efficiency and maximum power potential. I'm wondering
> how in the world I'm going to get 200whp hooked to the
> ground...300whp in a 1900lb car on an autocross would
> be completely unmanagable and slow me down. I also
> need to be able to apply power whenever I want, *NOW*.
> There are people who are pretty successful at planning
> in advance for turbo lag on an autocross, but it is
> definitely not an ideal situation. If they make a
> slight mistake in their timing, it costs them several
> tenths of a second to correct, then potentially a
> second or more to get the boost back up. That's the
> difference between an easy 1st place and 10th at a big
> event.

hmm. When I go to the autocross the two biggest stars there are the
mr2...turbo, and the late gen rx7... turbo. Not to mention all the
turbocharged miatas... When you are on a track and you are reacting solely
to the track and not other cars, the turbo shouldn't hurt you a bit. In fact
the lag (what little there is in any modern turbo car) will help you stay
hooked up, and even keep you from breaking your car. As you know, it's much
more important to be smooth than to be fast.


> Additionally, having a direct relationship between
> throttle position and power output is a huge
> advantage. I've talked to enough Supra drivers to
> understand the issues created when you're navigating a
> long-ish sweeper or a slalom at part throttle in a
> big-boost turbo car. Just about the time you've set
> the car up nicely for the turn, and balanced the
> brakes, throttle, and steering on the head of a pin,
> 20psi of boost comes rushing in to mess it all up! At
> 3500rpm a Supra might make 150whp...but 1/2sec later
> at 3600rpm it could be doing 350whp! There is NO
> in-between. Managing that situation definitely takes
> time/attention away from driving faster.

So you are saying that he couldn't let off the gas and get thru there in the
same way you would? I'm not sure I can make any kind meaningful argument in
this example. Far too many variables.


>
> And on top of it all, my rough calculations indicate
> that, presuming the same intercooler size/location, a
> G60 setup is probably at least 15-30lbs lighter than a
> turbo. The G60 itself is only about 15lbs, there's
> much less plumbing, no extra manifold weight, no
> wastegate (well, the bypass valve on the TB weighs a
> few ounces, I suppose), etc. When you rely on light
> weight to beat 600hp AWD cars, 30lbs does matter.

I tend to think the two systems would be basically the same weight, the only
real difference is the wastegate, and it weighs maybe 5lbs. Regarding
plumbing - with a turbo I have one tube running from filter to turbo, one
from turbo to IC, one from IC to intake. You will have one from filter to
blower, one from blower to IC, one from IC to intake. You will have to move
something (Alt, AC, etc) to the back of the motor or delete it, whereas I
can mount all my aux stuff in common locations. Not sure how you will mount
the intercooler from the corrado, but it's a pig anyway, you'd be better off
with an aftermarket one, of course if you do that you will be making custom
intake hoses, something you seemed opposed to.

Question: which VW chassis are you considering for the swap? A2? If you are
determined to have a Golf with a G-lader, maybe you would consider buying
one already set-up? There's one here that belongs to a friend of mine. He's
a mechanic with too much going on to mess with it. He's got about 5k in it I
think. It has been described as "Too fast for that chassis" - He bought it
as a track car from another local dubber. That might be a good deal for you
after you consider the expense of all the stuff you will need. Looks like
the guys did a pretty good job on it too, I've seen it first hand a couple
of times, but I've yet to ride in it. In NC if it's of any interest.

-Noah
-86 Audi 5ktq
-84 Audi Quattro
-82 Chevy Rollback wrecker! 454cu yeehaw!
-Yard full of VWs that will become one car soon