advantages between roots and centrifugal?
advantages between roots and centrifugal? i have a procharger but was just wondering.. if both style superchargers run the same boost, wont the roots win cuz it hits it right away while the centrifugal has to spool it up? i never even understood the advantage the procharger has.. like its not even as good as a turbo because it doesnt hit max boost once it spools, it takes little by little all the way to redline.. So if what im saying is true, then roots will win because it will hit max boost right away while centrifugal chargers wait to spool it up..
unless roots has some kind of disadvantage i really dont know of ?? Any opinions on this ?
unless roots has some kind of disadvantage i really dont know of ?? Any opinions on this ?
Roots (Positive displacement) blowers do produce power much lower in the RPM band, but typically lose steam as the rpm goes up. A lot of Maggie owners complain that the blower is done at 5000 rpm. A top mounted blower also soaks in all the heat from the engine, as heat rises, and it is harder to intercool them.
We see '03-'04 Cobras and Ford Lighning trucks on our Mustang Dyno good for only one run, after that they lose on average 50 rwhp. Bob
We see '03-'04 Cobras and Ford Lighning trucks on our Mustang Dyno good for only one run, after that they lose on average 50 rwhp. Bob
yeah, the roots blowers heat soak and are done after a few runs, prob why soo many cobras do N20 to cool them down and gain power all in one. they make crazy power down low, but loose steam up top
Launching!
Joined: May 2007
Posts: 250
Likes: 0
From: DFW
Originally Posted by Exotic Performance Plus
Roots (Positive displacement) blowers do produce power much lower in the RPM band, but typically lose steam as the rpm goes up. A lot of Maggie owners complain that the blower is done at 5000 rpm. A top mounted blower also soaks in all the heat from the engine, as heat rises, and it is harder to intercool them.
We see '03-'04 Cobras and Ford Lighning trucks on our Mustang Dyno good for only one run, after that they lose on average 50 rwhp. Bob
We see '03-'04 Cobras and Ford Lighning trucks on our Mustang Dyno good for only one run, after that they lose on average 50 rwhp. Bob
Staging Lane
Joined: Jul 2007
Posts: 67
Likes: 0
From: Arizona, for now
typically tho, a positive displacement blower uses more power to spin, generates peak boost sooner, and is more difficult to cool
centrifugal supercharger is basically a belt driven turbo, you can use an air to air intercooler, and they're fairly easy to tune because the boost is so linear
turbos have the least parasitic loss of all, but require drastic changes to the exhaust and intake plumbing in the engine bay, are more difficult to tune because of differing boost response under different conditions, and will make the most power out of all 3 setups.
it just depends what you want out of the car. off the line snap, you get a positive displacement (roots or twin screw). for boosted (no pun intended) performance through the whole rev range, get a centrifugal. if you want max power and can deal with just a little lag, go with a turbo. turbos also, if you can keep your foot out of the gas, won't change your gas mileage all that much, because you'll drive around in vacuum, rather than at 2-3 psi.
centrifugal supercharger is basically a belt driven turbo, you can use an air to air intercooler, and they're fairly easy to tune because the boost is so linear
turbos have the least parasitic loss of all, but require drastic changes to the exhaust and intake plumbing in the engine bay, are more difficult to tune because of differing boost response under different conditions, and will make the most power out of all 3 setups.
it just depends what you want out of the car. off the line snap, you get a positive displacement (roots or twin screw). for boosted (no pun intended) performance through the whole rev range, get a centrifugal. if you want max power and can deal with just a little lag, go with a turbo. turbos also, if you can keep your foot out of the gas, won't change your gas mileage all that much, because you'll drive around in vacuum, rather than at 2-3 psi.
Trending Topics
I had the magnacharger on my car. It was nice and ran fast, 520rwhp. I was running 10psi of boost on the stock motor with just a cam(224/224 115LSA) and headers. Traped 122-123mph in the quater mile. I then switched to a Paxton Novi 2000. I changed nothing else on the car but the blowers. AFR and timing were set the same. Still running the same 10psi. I picked up 100rwhp and 7mph in the quater mile. Traps were 130mph... 
Like others have said, heat soat is a huge problem with any roots or screw blower with the air to water intercooler setups and they really fall off above 5000rpm....
Like others have said, heat soat is a huge problem with any roots or screw blower with the air to water intercooler setups and they really fall off above 5000rpm....
LS1 Tech Stories
The Best V8 Stories One Small Block at Time
6 Common C5 Corvette Failures and What's Involved In Repairing Them
Pouria Savadkouei
Retro Modern Bandit Pontiac Trans AM Comes With Burt Reynolds' Autograph
Verdad Gallardo
Top 10 Greatest Cadillac V Series Performance Models Ever, Ranked
Pouria Savadkouei
Top 10 Most Powerful Chevy Trucks Ever Made!
Hennessey's New Supercharged Silverado ZR2 Has 700 HP
Verdad Gallardo
Coachbuilt N2A Anteros Is an LS2-Powered C6 Corvette In Italian Clothes
Verdad Gallardo
Awesome K5 Blazer Restomod Comes With C7 Corvette Power
Verdad Gallardo
10 Camaros You Should Never Buy
10 LS Engine Myths That Refuse to Die
Verdad Gallardo
Originally Posted by chriswtx
I had the magnacharger on my car. It was nice and ran fast, 520rwhp. I was running 10psi of boost on the stock motor with just a cam(224/224 115LSA) and headers. Traped 122-123mph in the quater mile. I then switched to a Paxton Novi 2000. I changed nothing else on the car but the blowers. AFR and timing were set the same. Still running the same 10psi. I picked up 100rwhp and 7mph in the quater mile. Traps were 130mph...
Like others have said, heat soat is a huge problem with any roots or screw blower with the air to water intercooler setups and they really fall off above 5000rpm....
Like others have said, heat soat is a huge problem with any roots or screw blower with the air to water intercooler setups and they really fall off above 5000rpm....
Another issue with roots style blowers is traction... It makes so much tq down low if you just spin then your kinda wasting the power. Centrifugal S/C's are more linear and allow for more controllable and expected power.
You picked up 7mph in the 1/4 cause of obviously the 100hp increase and top end pull of a centri...
Now, you throw a pair of 28 inch slicks with a 3.3 twin screw whipple and stroker motor and hold on!!!
TECH Addict
Joined: Jul 2005
Posts: 2,153
Likes: 3
Each has its purpose.
I love the Eaton on my Lightning. It may make squat for power over 5000 rpm (also blame the 4.13" stroke of the 5.4), but for tip-in acceleration and trailer towing, it can't be beat.
I really liked the centrifugal (T-trim) that I had on my '95 Z. It had instant response and pulled great up top, to the tune of 10.4 @ 133 mph.
My current turbo makes the most power (146 in the quarter now), but when you hit the gas it's like stepping on the sponge. It feels like there's a big spring and damper in the throttle cable. You hit the gas and get 300 hp, then 2 seconds later the other 600 wake up.
My jet ski has a centrifugual blower, which is perfect for that application. No lag at all. The characteristic of a jet drive is that, from a dead stop, if you hit the gas, the engine goes to within 500 rpm of peak hp and stays there. If it had a roots blower (a la Ultra 250), then all the low-end response and torque would go to waste because the engine is never under a load down there.
MM&FF did a full dyno test a while back with a '03/'04 Cobra motor. They tested the stock Eaton, a Kenne Belle, a Vortech, and twin turbo's all on the same engine, all at the same 14 psi boost. The Eaton made 580 hp & 575 ftlb, the KB made 705 hp & 595 ftlb, Vortech made 725 hp & 580 ftlb (though it lost almost 300 ftlb from the Eaton down low), and turbo's made 830 hp & 755 ftlb (though it lost 200 ftlb from the Eaton down low before spoolup) all at the flywheel. That pretty much sums it up.
Mike
I love the Eaton on my Lightning. It may make squat for power over 5000 rpm (also blame the 4.13" stroke of the 5.4), but for tip-in acceleration and trailer towing, it can't be beat.
I really liked the centrifugal (T-trim) that I had on my '95 Z. It had instant response and pulled great up top, to the tune of 10.4 @ 133 mph.
My current turbo makes the most power (146 in the quarter now), but when you hit the gas it's like stepping on the sponge. It feels like there's a big spring and damper in the throttle cable. You hit the gas and get 300 hp, then 2 seconds later the other 600 wake up.
My jet ski has a centrifugual blower, which is perfect for that application. No lag at all. The characteristic of a jet drive is that, from a dead stop, if you hit the gas, the engine goes to within 500 rpm of peak hp and stays there. If it had a roots blower (a la Ultra 250), then all the low-end response and torque would go to waste because the engine is never under a load down there.
MM&FF did a full dyno test a while back with a '03/'04 Cobra motor. They tested the stock Eaton, a Kenne Belle, a Vortech, and twin turbo's all on the same engine, all at the same 14 psi boost. The Eaton made 580 hp & 575 ftlb, the KB made 705 hp & 595 ftlb, Vortech made 725 hp & 580 ftlb (though it lost almost 300 ftlb from the Eaton down low), and turbo's made 830 hp & 755 ftlb (though it lost 200 ftlb from the Eaton down low before spoolup) all at the flywheel. That pretty much sums it up.
Mike
Last edited by engineermike; Jul 19, 2007 at 09:39 PM.
Originally Posted by engineermike
Each has its purpose.
I love the Eaton on my Lightning. It may make squat for power over 5000 rpm (also blame the 4.13" stroke of the 5.4), but for tip-in acceleration and trailer towing, it can't be beat.
I really liked the centrifugal (T-trim) that I had on my '95 Z. It had instant response and pulled great up top, to the tune of 10.4 @ 133 mph.
My current turbo makes the most power (146 in the quarter now), but when you hit the gas it's like stepping on the sponge. It feels like there's a big spring and damper in the throttle cable. You hit the gas and get 300 hp, then 2 seconds later the other 600 wake up.
My jet ski has a centrifugual blower, which is perfect for that application. No lag at all. The characteristic of a jet drive is that, from a dead stop, if you hit the gas, the engine goes to within 500 rpm of peak hp and stays there. If it had a roots blower (a la Ultra 250), then all the low-end response and torque would go to waste because the engine is never under a load down there.
MM&FF did a full dyno test a while back with a '03/'04 Cobra motor. They tested the stock Eaton, a Kenne Belle, a Vortech, and twin turbo's all on the same engine, all at the same 14 psi boost. The Eaton made 580 hp & 575 ftlb, the KB made 705 hp & 595 ftlb, Vortech made 725 hp & 580 ftlb (though it lost almost 300 ftlb from the Eaton down low), and turbo's made 830 hp & 755 ftlb (though it lost 200 ftlb from the Eaton down low before spoolup) all at the flywheel. That pretty much sums it up.
Mike
I love the Eaton on my Lightning. It may make squat for power over 5000 rpm (also blame the 4.13" stroke of the 5.4), but for tip-in acceleration and trailer towing, it can't be beat.
I really liked the centrifugal (T-trim) that I had on my '95 Z. It had instant response and pulled great up top, to the tune of 10.4 @ 133 mph.
My current turbo makes the most power (146 in the quarter now), but when you hit the gas it's like stepping on the sponge. It feels like there's a big spring and damper in the throttle cable. You hit the gas and get 300 hp, then 2 seconds later the other 600 wake up.
My jet ski has a centrifugual blower, which is perfect for that application. No lag at all. The characteristic of a jet drive is that, from a dead stop, if you hit the gas, the engine goes to within 500 rpm of peak hp and stays there. If it had a roots blower (a la Ultra 250), then all the low-end response and torque would go to waste because the engine is never under a load down there.
MM&FF did a full dyno test a while back with a '03/'04 Cobra motor. They tested the stock Eaton, a Kenne Belle, a Vortech, and twin turbo's all on the same engine, all at the same 14 psi boost. The Eaton made 580 hp & 575 ftlb, the KB made 705 hp & 595 ftlb, Vortech made 725 hp & 580 ftlb (though it lost almost 300 ftlb from the Eaton down low), and turbo's made 830 hp & 755 ftlb (though it lost 200 ftlb from the Eaton down low before spoolup) all at the flywheel. That pretty much sums it up.
Mike
A lot of useful info has been posted here, but it does lack one mention. Twinscrew s/c's can be had in a side mount configuration that allows for a REAL intercooler, as opposed to the commonly available manifold mounted a/w heatsoaks. This is a VERY underutilized approach that is almost impossible to fit on an F-body, but does merit mention in general boosting terms.
Launching!
Joined: Mar 2007
Posts: 227
Likes: 29
From: DC Metro area
Originally Posted by 99Z28LS1
yeah, the roots blowers heat soak and are done after a few runs... they make crazy power down low, but loose steam up top
My GTP can MAYBE make 2 runs back-to-back before its DONE and needs a cool-down. And yeah, its great down low but it falls WAY OFF above 5000 rpm.
Twinscrew s/c's can be had in a side mount configuration that allows for a REAL intercooler, as opposed to the commonly available manifold mounted a/w heatsoaks. This is a VERY underutilized approach that is almost impossible to fit on an F-body, but does merit mention in general boosting terms.
Jim
Originally Posted by DeltaT
It merits discussion in a theoretical sense, but talk about underutilized - I've never seen a car set up that way, and unless you had an old truck or something with a huge engine compartment, you would have a very hard time shoehorning in a unit big enough to warrant the trouble on a 350ci.+ V8.
Jim
Jim
Originally Posted by DeltaT
If you ever dig them up I'd like to see them.
How did it look from a heat soak perspective?
Jim
How did it look from a heat soak perspective?
Jim
TECH Enthusiast
Joined: Mar 2004
Posts: 604
Likes: 0
From: Loganville, GA
Originally Posted by kp
Uses a FMIC I believe, not sure who's kit it was but I think its a production or soon to be produced kit. If it has some kind of intercooler then heat would really be no worse then a turbo mounted in the same spot.
Why are you no longer a mod? (or at least green)