Except you have to drill and tap your oil sump for an oil return line, which is a real PITA.

 

https://www.s2ki.com/forums/index.php?act=m...mage&img=680929

 

If my understanding of how sc / turbots work is off kilter then please someone correct me, but I think the quoted post is wide of the mark-

A Supercharger will be spinning constantly (being belt driven), and the size of the charger is what will determine at what point it starts to provide useful levels of boost.

I always thought that an SC was therefore more progressive than a turbo, but that not really the case.

Turbos on the other hand - a small one will spin up quickly, giving a limited amount of low down boost before they run out of puff long before you're out of puff, or, with a larger unit, you'll get lots of lag and then a great big wedge of power.

This whole situation is largely why we get sequential turbo setups, or turbo + supercharger. A quick spooling little one, and a big fat laggy one - to cover the whole rev range.

Alternatively, nitrous to cover the lag.

I'm working on a pretty exciting triple turbo setup that will hugely reduce the lag time whilst delivering the punch of a huge turbo. Theoretically allowing for a T88 snail to be used on a 1.4 Jazz, with no noticable lag. I've got a couple of technical drawings on my work computer that illustrate it, I'll post them up on here when I'm back in the office tmrw.

 

That was the reason I went for the Rotrex and nerver really considered the Comptech.

 

I would like a bit more power for my Jizz

 

Modern turbo's are much less laggy. Evo has very little.

But a 1.4 might be a bit tricky to fit a big one to.

Variable vane is another option, but pricey.

 

Have to disagree with you.... I have a so called large turbo gt35r and I am in full spool by 3500 rpm the lag is minimal

I have seen and read about a dual turb'd gt28 . Not alot of difference to the single turbo'd s2000.

But back to topic I really like the ct s/c but still feel turbo's are more suited to the s2000 providing they are tuned right but that also goes with the sc that needs tuning correctly

 

I've driven an S with an SC and, whilst it was blisteringly quick, I thought the power was inaccessible for public roads. A stock S is very quick and also pointless on public roads - by the time you're in VtEC, in 3rd gear say, you'll be past the speed limit for motorway and well past the speed limit for A/B roads.

I'd go as far as to say that a stock S would be as fast as an SC'd S in the real world. On a motorway or dual carriage way the SC would be quicker, but there wouldn't be much in it in the twisties. By the time the SC'd S is getting in to its stride you'd have to brake for a corner or whatever.

A turbo S would be quicker because it would be able to access the power earlier. Ok, it would overheat, there would lag, but it would have better torque numebers. On track the SC would probably perform better - in the real world and on public roads I'm not sure.

IMO the S needs more torque, low down torque. Top end power is good, but unless you're on a track you wont be able to access the power.

If you look at dyno graphs of SC'd cars, they make peak power at 9k+ rpms. They don't make much out of VTEC, then they surge to redline. I just don't know where one could drive on public roads to utilise the power.

Just my view based on the limited experience I have with the S.

 

But the car is designed to be revved into VTEC?? Power and torque below that aren't so relevant imo, as the gearing of the car means that when you redline it and change gear, you are in VTEC again.

The bonus of the turbo is you dont have to change down though.

 

I have heard the same argument against VTEC

Just keep the S in the happy zone by using the right gear.




Edit - MB beat me to it. SNAP.