Turbo cam vs blower cam - ECS 1500
 

Hello all - I've been running a twin turbo setup for the past few years and I've decided to switch it up and go blower. I currently have a Tick Stage 2 LS2 Turbo cam installed in the car - how much am I giving away with this cam VS a good blower cam?

Specs are:

235/231 | .635"/.605" | LSA114+6

Can I say less than what you are giving up by switching... ?

haha - this is true. I'm going road course and wanted a little less heat, lag & weight so I decided to pick up a blower kit. got it fairly cheap after selling off my turbo setup.

i am just curious as to if it's going to run terrible with the reverse split cam with a blower. not extremely worried about high HP as I can just pulley it to get that number

That depends on your definition of a good blower cam, how much power you want, what sort of rpm's you need, etc etc

Really though, unless the cam swap is easy in your vehicle I wouldnt even be bothering to change it.

Exactly what I was hoping to hear. Thanks stevie. I'll plan to keep the turbo cam for now and see how she rolls.

It's not like the car won't start and run. Much easier to just give it a try and see how you like it for what you're doing. It'll still run decent. 100%.....no, but good enough to have fun........yes.

Have you ever owned a blower? they tend to make the heat problem worse. A good turbo setup will always outperform a blower, especially when it comes to something like compressor discharge air temps comparison. Problems with temp rise and heat soak are commonly due to misconfiguraiton; sounds like you need coated exhaust, blankets, heat wrap, and some good old water injection to get things right.

Stop smoking crack.

:chuck-bal:

:corn:

:funny:

I dont... are you saying blowers > turbos? because that was not true the last time I checked. Did something change? Sorry if I am wrong, and now there are blowers which out perform turbochargers.

blowers also wreak havoc on your engine bearings, as an aside.

So please explain why the blower the OP wants to use would suffer a heat problem, why discharge temps might be poor ?

It is simply common knowledge (or so I was under the impression) that blowers:
1. work over the engine bearings (harder than a turbo would)
2. work the engine harder (than a turbo would)
3. give reduced performance (compared to an equivalent turbocharger)

Did any of this change while I was asleep?

And not one of those things answers my question.

He never mentioned which blower in the first post. It's irrelevant, since if you can't properly size your turbo/blower you have bigger problems.

This isn't "lets play mind games with kingtal0n" thread. Make a point, ask a real question, fine. But do not ask rhetorical nonsense.

here is a great example of an engineer who had temp problems using a blower, and decided to design his own twin rear mount turbocharger system. Coating, wrapping, insulation, and methanol/water injection (or E85) are the cures, not going backwards to a blower.

http://www.nsxprime.com/forum/showth...77#post1859077

He never mentioned which blower in the first post...



Hmmmmmmm whilst I guess that is factually correct, look at the fucking thread title.

Title has which blower I'm using - ECS 1500 kit (Paxton 1500). This is a centrifugal supercharger and will likely have a lot less heat soak than the blowers you're thinking of. I went with it because on a C6 corvette - the turbo setups are typically expensive or have odd placement.

That being said - I've ran two twin turbo setups on the car so far using fender mounted turbos and I wanted to try something different. I only want to make 600~ so this blower seems perfect. I got it for less than building another turbo setup would be and like the idea that I don't have to worry about wastegates or vac lines failing and blowing my motor.

I understand the desire for "something different".

Even with knowledge of which blower you are running (I didn't realize an ECS 1500 was a type of blower) you still cannot "know" whether it will run in or out of it's efficiency range without knowing what kind of engine is under it, and even then its just math that doesn't represent a real running condition. So to answer the pointless rhetoric yet again, it is irrelevant that the op posted which blower he/she is running without the intention of application and displacement/rpm of the engine in question with which to do math (which I will gladly do provided these details)... but none of that escapes the fact that the discharge temperatures of a blower will usually be higher than that of a similarly applicable turbocharger under the same conditions. As long as the thread op is aware that he is going back into the stone age (turbo -> blower) for something "different" my work here is done (awareness).

King, you are seriously fucking clueless.

Your total lack of knowledge is almost beyond belief. If you have no clue what you're talking about it is much easier not to post at all.

@2005Vette, just ignore that twat.

Your choice is 100% a tried and tested package, very efficient and will perform superbly in every respect.

There really arent any negatives to be said about it

he says, without answering either his own question or providing any evidence otherwise.

Except of course for these fine points which he is also unable to provide any evidence against:

It is simply common knowledge (or so I was under the impression) that blowers:
1. work over the engine bearings (harder than a turbo would)
2. work the engine harder (than a turbo would)
3. give reduced performance (compared to an equivalent turbocharger)


Thread op just wants to try something different. Thats all, and I get that. Healthy men are like that.