Shelby/Paxton SC dyno results and Videos

[ShelbyGT/SC]

 

great results..thems whipple is tough to beat...I threw everything my wallet had at !! but should you beat me light to light, i can always pop the hood and beat you over the head with MY STRUT BRACE !!!lol

 

Thanks, and Ouch!

 

This should be pretty much standard for all the Whipple's so anyone with the Whipple, simply copy this dyno and replace my name with yours and save some money. LOL

[SWEDESHELBY1]

I'm sorry there is just a great deal of misinformation here please have a read Whipple facts.

 

 

The Whipple is the ONLY way to go after reading this information. Good website~

[clawsonbob]

The Whipple is the ONLY way to go after reading this information. Good website~

 

 

Swede...before you get too settled in AND toss the Paxton /Logo / provonence/ the strut tower brace AND just to keep the witty bantor going...the "whipple facts " are whipple marketing material.

 

Don't get me wrong....there is little doubt the trq curve is lower rpm & flatter...it was my bogey all along and I wish I coulda replicated it. .

 

But with both cars enjoying a few hundered feet of wheel spin in first two gears, I would bet more on the Archer than the arrows. Tires/traction and gearing could really change the outcomes as well. Ask Adam or any whipple or paxton guy if "hook-up" is a big issue.

 

Finally, with another 1000 rpm worth of steam at the top end , there are plenty of races won/lost at the end. I believe the case is that "on any given sunday" the rsults are not always predictable. I have had a few thousand hp thru my garage over the years and the results of either of these applications is terrific over the stock gt. The relative differences in figures would not likely make anywhere near the difference as 2/10s of a second reaction time from the light or on the gas...just my two cents...I LOVE "keyboard racing" ...everybody wins a lap !!!!

[ShelbyGT/SC]

 

Swede...before you get too settled in AND toss the Paxton /Logo / provonence/ the strut tower brace AND just to keep the witty bantor going...the "whipple facts " are whipple marketing material.

 

Don't get me wrong....there is little doubt the trq curve is lower rpm & flatter...it was my bogey all along and I wish I coulda replicated it. .

 

But with both cars enjoying a few hundered feet of wheel spin in first two gears, I would bet more on the Archer than the arrows. Tires/traction and gearing could really change the outcomes as well. Ask Adam or any whipple or paxton guy if "hook-up" is a big issue.

 

Finally, with another 1000 rpm worth of steam at the top end , there are plenty of races won/lost at the end. I believe the case is that "on any given sunday" the rsults are not always predictable. I have had a few thousand hp thru my garage over the years and the results of either of these applications is terrific over the stock gt. The relative differences in figures would not likely make anywhere near the difference as 2/10s of a second reaction time from the light or on the gas...just my two cents...I LOVE "keyboard racing" ...everybody wins a lap !!!!

 

First, second AND third.

 

In the race that I did do against a 2004 Mach 1, he took off much better than I did but when I finally gripped in 3rd, I caught up to him really quickly. I am going to get slicks for next spring (and take classes). Someone at SAI suggested to go without slicks to have the tires the least point of resistance to protect the engine and driveshaft, but after seeing Loui's success, I still might get the slicks. Naturally, I am concerned with the engine so professor Roger is looking into replacement engines for us to store our stock engines and race with the crate ones.

[RogerS]

All I will say to that is "FORGED".

[clawsonbob]

First, second AND third.

 

In the race that I did do against a 2004 Mach 1, he took off much better than I did but when I finally gripped in 3rd, I caught up to him really quickly. I am going to get slicks for next spring (and take classes). Someone at SAI suggested to go without slicks to have the tires the least point of resistance to protect the engine and driveshaft, but after seeing Loui's success, I still might get the slicks. Naturally, I am concerned with the engine so professor Roger is looking into replacement engines for us to store our stock engines and race with the crate ones.

 

 

 

 

that tire advice re point of least resistance ( for a street car) ain't a bad idea. I have built three vehicles to the edge of "mechanically safe"....and we are all there at these power levels. If driven hard for long, we WILL EXPIERENCE broken drive shafts, bent/failed u-joints, fried/shattered clutches etc. I have done all of these quite a few times. A solid hook up /hard and in the power band, WiLL BUST UP STOCK sh_t. period.

 

An little too much throttle in cornering or even changing lanes , coming into the power band while changing directions can become a fatal accident. 500 hp/trq numbers in a 3600 lb car can be a handfull.......many of the owners seems to be expierenced/mature drivers, but any one of us can find them selves in trouble in a tenth of a second with these cars. lets all read all that others have learned and know this......safety is paramount ...the endless chase to have the most ( trust me, I know that chase) is futile. somebody else will;always spend a bit more, be willing to break more and at the end, risk more. lets not get too carried away with the pursuit of speed ( at least on the street)

[ShelbyGT/SC]

 

 

 

that tire advice re point of least resistance ( for a street car) ain't a bad idea. I have built three vehicles to the edge of "mechanically safe"....and we are all there at these power levels. If driven hard for long, we WILL EXPIERENCE broken drive shafts, bent/faild u-joints, fried/shattered clutches etc. I have done all of these quite a few times. A solid hook up /hard and in the power band, WiLL BUST UP STOCK sh_t. period.

 

An little too much throttle in cornering or even changing lanes and coming into the power band while changing directions can become a fatal accident. 500 hp/trq numbers in a 3600 lb car can be a handfull.......many of the owners seems to be expierenced/mature drivers, but any one can find them selves in trouble in a tenth of a second with these cars. lets all read all that others have learned and know this......safety is paramount ...the endless chase to have the most ( trust me, I know that chase) is futile. somebody else will;always spend a bit more, be willing to break more and at the end, risk more. lets not get too carried away with the pursuit of speed ( at least on the street)

 

Awesome advice.

 

And, I am only talking about the track, not the street.

 

But still awesome advice.

[LuLu]

I'm sorry there is just a great deal of misinformation here please have a read Whipple facts.

 

 

I'm not interested in starting a supercharger war here, but the truth is that some folks don't know the truth when they read it. I've owned and raced all three styles of superchargers available today, centrifugal, twin screw positive displacement and Roots. The brand names may vary, but their performance qualities do not.

 

I stated no mis-truths. It's all my personal experience, not some slick flow chart advertisement from a web site. Any web site that says the twin screw is silent while the centrifugal is "very noisey", tells a flat out lie. Remember what you are reading, who wrote it, and why.

 

Roots and twin screw will provide the premium power available from a standing start. Gobs of power, hands down. You really need to have your traction and control systems tuned to exploit all this power, or you will go up in smoke. Moreobver, twin screw and Roots have PRM limitations, points in the power band where they flatten out and fail to provide any boost at all. On any 4.6L 2-3-4 valve engine with 4:10 gears, you will run out of supercharged power before finishing the quarter mile race. You win because you get there first, true, but you won't win against an equally matched centrufugal. This is race track proven truth.

 

Centrifugal blowers do not build immediate power from a standing start, it takes some RPM to spool up to the blower's peak efficiency. But, once it does, hold on. There is no limitation at high RPM, other than the red-line of the engine itself. Centrifugals will provide valuable boost through 20,000 RPM, long after you need it. This is the rationale for rear gear and tranny gear ratio changes, to get the 4.6L into the power band sooner, and keep it there longer.

 

Any semi-pro drag rcer will tell you, and any semi-pro road racer will confirm it. Keeping the 4.6L in it's RPM sweet spot (2500-5800 RPM) is what it's all about.

 

I can post links just like you, dozens of them, but don't take my word for any of it. Grab any issue of MM&FF, and examine the champions. See who's first on race day in national competition, who's taking home the money. Turbocharged, twin turbocharged and centrifugal supercharging. Not a Roots/twin screw/positive displacement blower among them. Now ask yourself why.

 

Because they want to win.

 

Ask yourself why Carroll Shelby himself stuck with the Paxton/Novi centrifugal design all these years.

 

Because he wants to win.

 

I love lively discussion about many topics, but this topic got boring years ago because it never changes. Until there is some new science on it all, facts are facts, and I have nothing more to add today. Drive what you like, what you believe in, but if you are going to get serious about winning any track event, do your homework and avoid trash talking web sites more concerned about a sale pitch than a proven track record.

 

Happy motoring!

[SGT2666]

I'm not interested in starting a supercharger war here, but the truth is that some folks don't know the truth when they read it. I've owned and raced all three styles of superchargers available today, centrifugal, twin screw positive displacement and Roots. The brand names may vary, but their performance qualities do not.

 

I stated no mis-truths. It's all my personal experience, not some slick flow chart advertisement from a web site. Any web site that says the twin screw is silent while the centrifugal is "very noisey", tells a flat out lie. Remember what you are reading, who wrote it, and why.

 

Roots and twin screw will provide the premium power available from a standing start. Gobs of power, hands down. You really need to have your traction and control systems tuned to exploit all this power, or you will go up in smoke. Moreobver, twin screw and Roots have PRM limitations, points in the power band where they flatten out and fail to provide any boost at all. On any 4.6L 2-3-4 valve engine with 4:10 gears, you will run out of supercharged power before finishing the quarter mile race. You win because you get there first, true, but you won't win against an equally matched centrufugal. This is race track proven truth.

 

Centrifugal blowers do not build immediate power from a standing start, it takes some RPM to spool up to the blower's peak efficiency. But, once it does, hold on. There is no limitation at high RPM, other than the red-line of the engine itself. Centrifugals will provide valuable boost through 20,000 RPM, long after you need it. This is the rationale for rear gear and tranny gear ratio changes, to get the 4.6L into the power band sooner, and keep it there longer.

 

Any semi-pro drag rcer will tell you, and any semi-pro road racer will confirm it. Keeping the 4.6L in it's RPM sweet spot (2500-5800 RPM) is what it's all about.

 

I can post links just like you, dozens of them, but don't take my word for any of it. Grab any issue of MM&FF, and examine the champions. See who's first on race day in national competition, who's taking home the money. Turbocharged, twin turbocharged and centrifugal supercharging. Not a Roots/twin screw/positive displacement blower among them. Now ask yourself why.

 

Because they want to win.

 

Ask yourself why Carroll Shelby himself stuck with the Paxton/Novi centrifugal design all these years.

 

Because he wants to win.

 

I love lively discussion about many topics, but this topic got boring years ago because it never changes. Until there is some new science on it all, facts are facts, and I have nothing more to add today. Drive what you like, what you believe in, but if you are going to get serious about winning any track event, do your homework and avoid trash talking web sites more concerned about a sale pitch than a proven track record.

 

Happy motoring!

 

 

You imply that the centrifugal makes more power on top and that simply is not true. You imply that all roots style blowers are created equal thats simply not true the whipple design is much more efficient then the older designs. Possibly for the lmited application of drag racing you could argue that not having the strong bottom end enables you to get out of the hole better, but for most driving and fun factor horsepower everywhere is better and in reallity its better for drag racing to, its just a matter of wheather you can get the power to the ground. You don't see the big boys running centrifugal chargers and for all the die hard Carrol Shelby fans out there, when he built the next big thing the fastest most powerful shelby ever sold to the public he did not use a centrifugal. I say you should use whatever makes you happy, but don't spout a bunch of propoganda to support your buying decision.

[clawsonbob]

I'm not interested in starting a supercharger war here, but the truth is that some folks don't know the truth when they read it. I've owned and raced all three styles of superchargers available today, centrifugal, twin screw positive displacement and Roots. The brand names may vary, but their performance qualities do not.

 

I stated no mis-truths. It's all my personal experience, not some slick flow chart advertisement from a web site. Any web site that says the twin screw is silent while the centrifugal is "very noisey", tells a flat out lie. Remember what you are reading, who wrote it, and why.

 

Roots and twin screw will provide the premium power available from a standing start. Gobs of power, hands down. You really need to have your traction and control systems tuned to exploit all this power, or you will go up in smoke. Moreobver, twin screw and Roots have PRM limitations, points in the power band where they flatten out and fail to provide any boost at all. On any 4.6L 2-3-4 valve engine with 4:10 gears, you will run out of supercharged power before finishing the quarter mile race. You win because you get there first, true, but you won't win against an equally matched centrufugal. This is race track proven truth.

 

Centrifugal blowers do not build immediate power from a standing start, it takes some RPM to spool up to the blower's peak efficiency. But, once it does, hold on. There is no limitation at high RPM, other than the red-line of the engine itself. Centrifugals will provide valuable boost through 20,000 RPM, long after you need it. This is the rationale for rear gear and tranny gear ratio changes, to get the 4.6L into the power band sooner, and keep it there longer.

 

Any semi-pro drag rcer will tell you, and any semi-pro road racer will confirm it. Keeping the 4.6L in it's RPM sweet spot (2500-5800 RPM) is what it's all about.

 

I can post links just like you, dozens of them, but don't take my word for any of it. Grab any issue of MM&FF, and examine the champions. See who's first on race day in national competition, who's taking home the money. Turbocharged, twin turbocharged and centrifugal supercharging. Not a Roots/twin screw/positive displacement blower among them. Now ask yourself why.

 

Because they want to win.

 

Ask yourself why Carroll Shelby himself stuck with the Paxton/Novi centrifugal design all these years.

 

Because he wants to win.

 

I love lively discussion about many topics, but this topic got boring years ago because it never changes. Until there is some new science on it all, facts are facts, and I have nothing more to add today. Drive what you like, what you believe in, but if you are going to get serious about winning any track event, do your homework and avoid trash talking web sites more concerned about a sale pitch than a proven track record.

 

Happy motoring!

 

 

 

 

I don't want to start a supercharger war either, but how about a lively discussion ???

 

I have to acknoweledge a lot of Lu Lu' s points above. As I said earlier in this thread

 

" just to keep the witty bantor going...the "whipple facts " are whipple marketing material.

 

Don't get me wrong....there is little doubt the trq curve is lower rpm & flatter...it was my bogey all along and I wish I coulda replicated it. .

 

But with both cars enjoying a few hundered feet of wheel spin in first two gears, I would bet more on the Archer than the arrows. Tires/traction and gearing could really change the outcomes as well. Ask Adam or any whipple or paxton guy if "hook-up" is a big issue.

 

Finally, with another 1000 rpm worth of steam at the top end , there are plenty of races won/lost at the end."

 

 

race ya across the bench !!

[SGT2666]

I don't want to start a supercharger war either, but how about a lively discussion ???

 

I have to acknoweledge most of Lu Lu' s points above. As I saied earlier in this thread

 

" just to keep the witty bantor going...the "whipple facts " are whipple marketing material.

 

Don't get me wrong....there is little doubt the trq curve is lower rpm & flatter...it was my bogey all along and I wish I coulda replicated it. .

 

But with both cars enjoying a few hundered feet of wheel spin in first two gears, I would bet more on the Archer than the arrows. Tires/traction and gearing could really change the outcomes as well. Ask Adam or any whipple or paxton guy if "hook-up" is a big issue.

 

Finally, with another 1000 rpm worth of steam at the top end , there are plenty of races won/lost at the end."

race ya across the bench !!

 

 

while the whipple site is a marketing tool it is easily backed up by Dyno runs and by anecdotal evidence all over the web and in print.

[LuLu]

while the whipple site is a marketing tool it is easily backed up by Dyno runs and by anecdotal evidence all over the web and in print.

 

 

Dyno pulls are "anecdotal" in and by themselves, Wado. They are test tools and tell (predict) only half of the performance story.

 

My Random Dictonary says "anecdotal" is a "short narrative concerning an interesting event". Thus, dyno reports are just a sample, a "hint" if you will, of what you may expect on the blacktop and I do not disagree with this. A dyno is simply a preview, a "test report" on where you are now, and should be on the pavement. However, once your engine is trying to pull 3350 pounds down any 1320 and against wind resistence, the dyno prediction picture changes, sometime dramatically.

 

"Anecdotal"...Funny word, eh? Doctors and lawyers live by them before they open the case (or body) at hand. But, both doctors and lawyers "practice" their trade, yes? Even they do not know for sure until they get their eyes (or hands) on things. I just went through abdominal surgery to remove a tumor of notable size, and even then my doctor's expectations were "anecdotal." He said "I won't know more until I see it", thus, his expectations were "anecdotal."

 

I've "been there, did that" with cars and my 411 is not anecdotal. Roots/twin screw and PD blowers are liminted by their own RPM limitations, you can "screw" just so fast. Match that against the RPM of a mouse motor like the 4.6L, and you will see what I mean.

 

Centrifugal blowers are not so limited. They can spin (and deliver power/boost) well beyond the "safe" RPM of our 4.6L engines. Pick the wrong pulley and you'll "blow" your bottom end right out of the car.

 

Let's remember that we do not have "forged", or, "built" short blocks from the factory. Our 3V 4.6L short block is a stock Ford modular 4.6L engine design dating back to 1998. Yes, we got "Teksid" block improvements along the way, as well as "NHV" improvements too. But, let us not ignore our legacy, our "WAP" (Windsor Aluminum Products) blocks (now cast in Mexico) are not unusually performance minded. In brief, our 3V engines are more stock Ford products, than not. Us SGT owners just got a few more Ford Racing options than other Mustangs.

 

Our 4.6L 3V block is a "square" design, 3.55 stroke by 3.54 bore...Square. Powdered metal rods (subject to stretch), cast iron crank (subject to extraneous vibration) and hypereutetic pistons (subject to detonation). Pick the wrong tune, and you will run lean, which eats away at the crown of the piston (detonation). Eat away the crown and you weaken the top ring, as well as throw an unballanced piston against the outside wall of the cylinder block. The piston will scratch against the piston wall, and you begin burining oil. The rest is ugly from here, I wish not to describe it again.

 

If y'all are inclined to throw a blower on this engine, stay safe? The reasonable limits are 8-9.5 pounds of boost, delivering 425-450 RWHP. Push it beyond that on the stock OEM GT engine and you are asking for directions to rebuild street. These 4.6L-3V engines are durable and very heavy duty, but within their own limitations. IMHO, 450 RWHP is max, anymore power shortens your bottom end longetivity.

 

Take it from someone who has pushed these limits, 450 RWHP is very respectable power from a 281 CID.

 

Happy Motoring!

[SGT2666]

Dyno pulls are "anecdotal" in and by themselves, Wado. They are test tools and tell (predict) only half of the performance story.

 

My Random Dictonary says "anecdotal" is a "short narrative concerning an interesting event". Thus, dyno reports are just a sample, a "hint" if you will, of what you may expect on the blacktop and I do not disagree with this. A dyno is simply a preview, a "test report" on where you are now, and should be on the pavement. However, once your engine is trying to pull 3350 pounds down any 1320 and against wind resistence, the dyno prediction picture changes, sometime dramatically.

 

"Anecdotal"...Funny word, eh? Doctors and lawyers live by them before they open the case (or body) at hand. But, both doctors and lawyers "practice" their trade, yes? Even they do not know for sure until they get their eyes (or hands) on things. I just went through abdominal surgery to remove a tumor of notable size, and even then my doctor's expectations were "anecdotal." He said "I won't know more until I see it", thus, his expectations were "anecdotal."

 

I've "been there, did that" with cars and my 411 is not anecdotal. Roots/twin screw and PD blowers are liminted by their own RPM limitations, you can "screw" just so fast. Match that against the RPM of a mouse motor like the 4.6L, and you will see what I mean.

 

Centrifugal blowers are not so limited. They can spin (and deliver power/boost) well beyond the "safe" RPM of our 4.6L engines. Pick the wrong pulley and you'll "blow" your bottom end right out of the car.

 

Let's remember that we do not have "forged", or, "built" short blocks from the factory. Our 3V 4.6L short block is a stock Ford modular 4.6L engine design dating back to 1998. Yes, we got "Teksid" block improvements along the way, as well as "NHV" improvements too. But, let us not ignore our legacy, our "WAP" (Windsor Aluminum Products) blocks (now cast in Mexico) are not unusually performance minded. In brief, our 3V engines are more stock Ford products, than not. Us SGT owners just got a few more Ford Racing options than other Mustangs.

 

Our 4.6L 3V block is a "square" design, 3.55 stroke by 3.54 bore...Square. Powdered metal rods (subject to stretch), cast iron crank (subject to extraneous vibration) and hypereutetic pistons (subject to detonation). Pick the wrong tune, and you will run lean, which eats away at the crown of the piston (detonation). Eat away the crown and you weaken the top ring, as well as throw an unballanced piston against the outside wall of the cylinder block. The piston will scratch against the piston wall, and you begin burining oil. The rest is ugly from here, I wish not to describe it again.

 

If y'all are inclined to throw a blower on this engine, stay safe? The reasonable limits are 8-9.5 pounds of boost, delivering 425-450 RWHP. Push it beyond that on the stock OEM GT engine and you are asking for directions to rebuild street. These 4.6L-3V engines are durable and very heavy duty, but within their own limitations. IMHO, 450 RWHP is max, anymore power shortens your bottom end longetivity.

 

Take it from someone who has pushed these limits, 450 RWHP is very respectable power from a 281 CID.

 

Happy Motoring!

 

 

Thanks for the info but I think I'll have to hang with the research that Ford and Whipple have done

[clawsonbob]

Dyno pulls are "anecdotal" in and by themselves, Wado. They are test tools and tell (predict) only half of the performance story.

 

My Random Dictonary says "anecdotal" is a "short narrative concerning an interesting event". Thus, dyno reports are just a sample, a "hint" if you will, of what you may expect on the blacktop and I do not disagree with this. A dyno is simply a preview, a "test report" on where you are now, and should be on the pavement. However, once your engine is trying to pull 3350 pounds down any 1320 and against wind resistence, the dyno prediction picture changes, sometime dramatically.

 

"Anecdotal"...Funny word, eh? Doctors and lawyers live by them before they open the case (or body) at hand. But, both doctors and lawyers "practice" their trade, yes? Even they do not know for sure until they get their eyes (or hands) on things. I just went through abdominal surgery to remove a tumor of notable size, and even then my doctor's expectations were "anecdotal." He said "I won't know more until I see it", thus, his expectations were "anecdotal."

 

I've "been there, did that" with cars and my 411 is not anecdotal. Roots/twin screw and PD blowers are liminted by their own RPM limitations, you can "screw" just so fast. Match that against the RPM of a mouse motor like the 4.6L, and you will see what I mean.

 

Centrifugal blowers are not so limited. They can spin (and deliver power/boost) well beyond the "safe" RPM of our 4.6L engines. Pick the wrong pulley and you'll "blow" your bottom end right out of the car.

 

Let's remember that we do not have "forged", or, "built" short blocks from the factory. Our 3V 4.6L short block is a stock Ford modular 4.6L engine design dating back to 1998. Yes, we got "Teksid" block improvements along the way, as well as "NHV" improvements too. But, let us not ignore our legacy, our "WAP" (Windsor Aluminum Products) blocks (now cast in Mexico) are not unusually performance minded. In brief, our 3V engines are more stock Ford products, than not. Us SGT owners just got a few more Ford Racing options than other Mustangs.

 

Our 4.6L 3V block is a "square" design, 3.55 stroke by 3.54 bore...Square. Powdered metal rods (subject to stretch), cast iron crank (subject to extraneous vibration) and hypereutetic pistons (subject to detonation). Pick the wrong tune, and you will run lean, which eats away at the crown of the piston (detonation). Eat away the crown and you weaken the top ring, as well as throw an unballanced piston against the outside wall of the cylinder block. The piston will scratch against the piston wall, and you begin burining oil. The rest is ugly from here, I wish not to describe it again.

 

If y'all are inclined to throw a blower on this engine, stay safe? The reasonable limits are 8-9.5 pounds of boost, delivering 425-450 RWHP. Push it beyond that on the stock OEM GT engine and you are asking for directions to rebuild street. These 4.6L-3V engines are durable and very heavy duty, but within their own limitations. IMHO, 450 RWHP is max, anymore power shortens your bottom end longetivity.

 

Take it from someone who has pushed these limits, 450 RWHP is very respectable power from a 281 CID.

 

Happy Motoring!

 

 

 

I didn't even know that my piston was "hypereutetic". (I figured it was no more eurotic than the next guys)

[LuLu]

Thanks for the info but I think I'll have to hang with the research that Ford and Whipple have done

 

 

Go for it. Respect what you believe in.

[nolastyankee_merged]

For those with the Paxton supercharger, what does the unit weigh? I have a good understanding of the weight of a roots/Whipple unit, but am not sure about the centrifugal? Can anyone advise?

 

My GT-H is getting a Paxton after Christmas!

[LuLu]

For those with the Paxton supercharger, what does the unit weigh? I have a good understanding of the weight of a roots/Whipple unit, but am not sure about the centrifugal? Can anyone advise?

 

My GT-H is getting a Paxton after Christmas!

 

Figure about 45-50 lbs. for the blower alone.

 

Maybe 75-80 lbs. for the entire air-to-air kit, and just under 100 lbs. for the water-to-air kit, added to the nose of the car in a complete install.

[clawsonbob]

Figure about 45-50 lbs. for the blower alone.

 

Maybe 75-80 lbs. for the entire air-to-air kit, and just under 100 lbs. for the water-to-air kit, added to the nose of the car in a complete install.

 

 

LuLu...its a bit lighter than that I think....I have an sai /pax sc kit with water to air IC...I would say whole she bang in the box was maybe 50 lbs dry..plus coolant . I also ditched the cast iron ehaust manifolds for for thin steel headers and threw out the stock cats for hi-flow minis.......bet the net increase is under 35 lbs. Relocate the battery to the trunk and voi-la ! no diff that I can notice.

[ShelbyGT#3658]

Thanks for all the good info guys. Great discussion!

[69dejavue]

I will not weigh in for or against a particular type of supercharger. But LuLu is correct reference the construction of our engines. They are just a garden variety without the forged pistons, forged cranks, forged rods. Ford made a 2.3 turbo mustang years ago and it was like a handgrenade with the pin already pulled. It was only a matter of time.

 

No matter what we do to these engines we still have the same factory red line as nothing internally has been done to lighten the reciprocating masses or strengthen any part of the engine. We can add superchargers etc but nothing has been done to the valve springs, etc to allow a higher rpm.

 

This talk is great for drag racing but I still prefer top end. 6000 rpm with 3.5 gears and stock dimension tires is still the same speed whether you have a turbo charger, super charger, or even strengthened internal parts.

 

Speaking of internal parts the old adage of a chain is only as strong as its weakest link describes our motors. If you strengthen any one part you will only put stress on the remaining parts until one of those break. So you replace that part and the cycle continues until the next weakes link (wrist pin, rod bearing, rod, crank, crank bearings, etc break.

 

Bottom line is we do not have handbuilt engines like the SVT GT 500 or like the old Ford engines from the late 60's (428 CJ, 429 CJ, 429 SCJ, Boss 302, B0ss 351, Boss 429, etc.) Those engines came from the factory with forged pistons, forged rods, forged cranks and four bolt mains.