Turbo on the stock bottom end...
I'm thinking that on my stock bottom end, a turbo would be the better choice. Won't the better efficiency of the turbo mean that I could attain the desired rwhp while requiring less power from the crankshaft? Less strain on the pistons/rings/etc?
Am I an idiot to do any sort of FI without upgrading the critical stock (80k miles) internals? How much would this cost with typical labor charges?
Plan is to use 72cc AFR 225 heads, 224/224/114 cam, FMIC. Goal is 550 rwhp smog-friendly.
Opinions/info most appreciated.
Thanks, Rich
your power goal with the heads is very easily attainable.
personally i like the supercharger since power is more linear whereas turbo's give you all the power in a burst, that will cause tire spin.
either way you go you can't go wrong.
By going to 72 cc AFR 225's I hope to lower compression for increased safety, too.
And I'm looking for informed opinions on the turbo vs. blower question: given the fact that an engine that is supporting a blower needs to work harder to spin the same boost... while the turbo is basically free boost. Seems to me that a guy can reach his power goal with less engine effort by choosing the turbo route.
Trending Topics
The Best V8 Stories One Small Block at Time
condolences on your loss, and thanks for chiming in.
But a Turbo definitely is harder on the clutch/trans/rear. If you'd like to minimize the SC engine wear/snout load on bearings you could buy a nicer ATI NASCAR style Damper.
The SC wear on the bearings is often mentioned; do you think the damper is a fix or a bandaid? Is this wear even an issue if we're talking about a car driven 3000 miles/year?
Thanks again for all opinions.


