qqwqeqwrqwqtq

Really depends on what you're after. Auto will be the most consistent, reliable, and likely quickest in the 1/4 mile.

I have 6 speeds in both of my turbo cars because that's what I enjoy driving the most, even if it doesn't translate to the quickest times at the track. I get more of an adrenaline rush launching and shifting my 9 sec 6-speed car than I ever did driving our 8 sec automatic shop car.

EPP

iTrader: (22)

Our ATI ProCharger equipped '95 Formula with it's internally stock LT1 doesn't make much power on the dyno, but with a turbo 400 it puts down decent 1/4 mile times. Check it out hrere. http://www.exoticperformanceplus.com...tCar.php?car=7 Quicker times will be seen soon, as we'll be removing several hundred pounds from this car very soon. Bob

Speed

iTrader: (33)

I've voted Turbo/Manual because they are a hell of a lot more fun and a hell of a lot more challenging to drive correctly. Plus I love the idea of having turning 2000 rpm at 80mph on the highway and getting good gas mileage for those long trips I take in my turbo cars.

There have been as many pissing contests about manual vs auto as there have been about turbo vs SC. What I stated above is my impression based on owning and building many turbo cars with both transmissions. All I can say is blot out the bullshit and glean what facts so you can and decide what you want. Everyone wants something different so it's up to you to decide what you want.

ty_ty13

iTrader: (42)

alot of people think a automatic is faster... thats completely wrong.... a well setup stick car and clutch will run circles around a auto with the same fwhp....

thats why in most classes non oem stick's are banned... which doesnt make sense because anyone can buy one.... but dont get me started on that subject... i really pisses me off ....

engineermike

This is correct. Problem is that 1 in 10 stick cars are well set up, but 9 out of 10 autos are set up well.

Mike

-Freak-

iTrader: (6)

(These are my notes and ideas as I have been researching.)

I'm expecting this to get ripped apart.

Hammering out a 2 year plan before I purchase any kit. I'm also thinking that in 2 years when the new Camaro comes out I might be able to pick up a used kit at a pretty good price.

Car will be used for street, rarely drag raced but will see some road course action.

To turbo or supercharge, that is the question...


Pros and Cons of both.

Supercharging:
I would probably use a Procharger. (The centrifugal chargers sound like there is a vacuum leak in the car and I think that would bug the hell out of me.)


Pros:
Easier install and can run headers and custom exhaust.
Procharger has self contained oiling so if it blows the motor oil is safe.
Don't have to worry about catalytic converters or motor spitting guts and ruining SC.
If the blower goes the metal will settle to the bottom of the intercooler and never make it to the motor.
Don't have to buy an aftermarket K member for clearance.


Cons:
Takes up to 20% of engine output to run it.
Higher fuel consumption?
Stressed motor more, driven off of the crank.
Fairly quiet on startup but gets loud once SC has heated up.
Can chew up belts or have belt slippage and loose boost.
In order to change boost you have to change pullies.


Turbo Charging:
Looking at the new APS TT setup. Haven't found a single turbo setup for similar pricing. (still looking)

Pros:
Free HP, no parasitic loss to run the system.
Silent operation until boost kicks in.
Less stress on the motor, not driven off the crank.
Adjust boost by turning a **** on boost controller
You can have a twin turbo setup which allows the boost to come on sooner. (depends on turbo size)
Greater torque per RPM



Cons:
If you spit a vavle or piston chunk your turbo(s) are dead.
Oil maintenance is more often because of the hot turbo(s) using engine oil.
Have to wait 2 minutes before shutting a turbo vehicle off so the oil in the turbos has a chance to cool down and you don't get burnt oil buildup on bearings which causes leaks. The effect is called coking.
There is lag, the amount depends on the turbo and placement.
Have to buy an aftermarket K member.
Lots of extra heat and potential overheating issues due to turbo(s) under the hood.
Twin turbo you will have quite a few more lines to run and more retained underhood heat due to the extra head unit.



GOALS:
Targeted hp: 450 - 475hp 500+tq
Boost RPM: starting around 2000 -2500k and last till 6k+.


Comments:
Either way i'm going to have to buy a wide band sensor and gauges to monitor fuel/air ratio. And then some engine tuning software if I plan on doing any of my own tuning.

According to what I have been told 98's are unable to do a live tune because they don't have the capability of changes on the fly. So it will be alot of driving and logging then staring at the logs, tweaking the settings and doing it all over again.

I've heard the stock engine is good for 500hp. Tranny should take about the same depending on how bad it gets beat on.
Rear end will blow with 500hp.

Once the kit is paid off and I have a little more $ in my pockets I'll redo the tranny and rear end and then move onto forging the motor and upping the boost. This is a long term project that will take a few years to do.

I'm probably getting in over my head expense wise but it should be to bad since this is something I don't plan on doing over night.

Granted I should build the rear and tranny first. But due to the amount of time
and and effort I'm having to sink into getting the wife to go along with it. I want the FI even if the car has to sit for a bit while i scrounge bone yards to fabricate a 9 inch.

I'm currently reading:
Maximum Boost - Corky Bell ( ISBN 0-8376-0160-6)

ty_ty13

iTrader: (42)

i beg to differ on the properly set up auto cars.... it takes so long to send back converters and have them reflashed and so forth... then if you take any weight off the car it has to go back or if you add more power you have to send it back.... you may spend about 7k$ on a stick but in the end its much cheaper...

engineermike

With those goals, I would not even consider any type of forced induction or nitrous. With guys making 480 - 500 RWhp (600+ fwhp) on heads/cam combinations and mild camshafts, there is no need to deal with the extra unreliability, difficult maintenance, and expense associated wtih FI.

Mike

engineermike

My experience was not like that. I bought a 9.5" turbo torque converter from PI and it was way too loose. I sent it back and they replaced it with a new 10.5" converter and it was perfect. Most company will re-stall once for free, then only charge about $200/re-stall after that. I have $700 in my converter, which was only the original purchase price. Heck, I could re-stall it a few more times and still come out cheap. Some of the dedicated turbo converter companies like PTC can do even better and nail it the first time.

And as far as changing power and weight and needing a converter re-stall, there is some truth there, but it's not as sensitive as you think. Some guys were able to add as much as 400 rwhp without the converter becoming a problem.

Mike

-Freak-

iTrader: (6)

Thats just the starting point.
I figured those are decent numbers to shoot for while running my stock rear and tranny. Granted I'll be pushing them harder then designed and failure is expected at some point.

TWS

iTrader: (63)

The ATI Procharger is a centrifugal blower. And it is not stealthy. You will hear it. I have seen people with Powerdyne's the could not really be heard.

My experience is limited to M6/Blown LS1's, which is what I have. I would love to drive an A4 car that is otherwise identical to mine and see what it's like.

I can tell you that any FI kit, if properly set up, will definitely make you smile after that first romp.

TWS

iTrader: (63)

Mike, I respectfully disagree.

He can hit that power level and still be relatively low maintenance with a "stock" blower set up. I mean stock as in the basic kit from either ATI or Vortech. Yeah, spark plug changes got even more "interesting", but my blower cars are in or real close to that RWHP power level and they are very reliable and get normal gas mileage unless I put my foot in it.

A motor build up can cost easily as much, depending on the details, and will beat the valve springs and get poor gas mileage all the time. It can also be less "streetable" than an FI setup. The devil is in the details on that one, and street manners can vary widely, but I think you get my point.

Now, I love quick N/A cars, but a "mild" FI setup can be really fun with not a lot of downsides.

ty_ty13

iTrader: (42)

i agree that you can get them very close with a 2-3 restalls... but unless you have a driveshaft monity Vs. rpm you cant get it "perfect" i have a friend thats had a 67 chevelle running since who knows when and tried to guess a converter ( guess meaning he had no comparison to DS Vs. rpm ) he'd kept getting closer after the years went by then he finally got it after several new converters/restalls and picked up another .15 on a new stall.....

it can be done and done right.... but if you do any kind of limited tire racing there is nothing that can beat a clutchless car.... too many conditions change to fast.... the track could be very good one night to very bad the next...i would bet that any A3 car that is FI that runs 6.0x in the 8th with a swap to a jefco/lenco would pick up another .2 from the swap alone.... it only takes about 10hp to run that 1:1 gear in the trannys where A3/A2 take alot more.

i just realized me and you cluttered up this guys thread... we can start another if you like

99Z28LS1

iTrader: (4)

i voted manial+turbo because im stubborn and love street racing. but if i was track only, then auto i would go

Ed Blown Vert

iTrader: (2)

I am pretty happy with my set-up. With the converter I can get into boost right away.

6techniques

iTrader: (7)

well when its all said and done, Ill be swapping a 2/3 speed into my car so I just voted auto instead of M6.

Silver02Z28

iTrader: (2)

For drag racing and stoplight drags, auto > stick for N/A, turbo and SC.
It's hard to get the launch right, bog, spin etc.