|
Whipple all the way! Procharger has a sh!tty fuel management strategy. Well it is good at melting stuff down anyway.
A custom tune is the best way to go along with a new fuel system. |
Originally Posted by tbanzer
(Post 2766401)
If you are limited to using a centrifical supercharger I would highly recomend the Vortech supercharger system. I have one on my 502mpi for about 100 hrs now and it has been very dependable and turnkey with no issues. I would be surprised if any system could be used without some type of ECU remaping.[/I]
|
I have seven seasons on my Procharger Efi with no problems,
they All need good fuel systems and proper tuning to live. |
Originally Posted by bcarpman
(Post 2766393)
The procharger is a more efficient blower in and of itself. Also, since the blower, intercooler, and intake manifold isn't all stuffed in on the top of the V, the intake and intercooler can also be much more efficient. The end result will be that the procharger will make more power with less boost. The compressor itself will also be more durable.
Having said that, the procharger will also not make boost as low in the rpm band. I would also hesitate to run ANY blower configuration without a recal. Any change of that magnitude really does need it. yes, it may run and make power without recaling, but it will not be optimum for power, fuel econ or engine life. I think "some" people still run whipples and roots type blowers because they look a lot cooler. If you don't need the low end torque (the procharger will catch up around 4000rpm), and don't care that you blower looks like an A/C compressor, the procharger is the way to go A centrifugal is not more efficient, simply not true. If you compare size vs. size, the positive displacement always has a much broader curve so if you wanted to plot a usable rpm range for blower efficiency, the twin screw would be far higher. Centrifugals have one major advantage though, but this also leads to other issues, they get to push through a throttle body while twin-screws suck through. It's easier to push. When your pulling throught the throttle blades, there's some slight loss. If everything is right, it's less than .1%, but in some cases, especially cars, this can be an issue. But we supply our own TB's for this reason, we give it the maximum amount of air available. The reason many go to a screw or roots now is the throttle response and torque. Although some say it's similar, it's clearly not, and the bigger the power, the bigger the difference. Example, on the 496, at 3000rpm, there is nearly 150lbs of torque difference. Boost for boost, they'll make close to the same power, when you have AF and timnig the same, but PC does zero to the PCM, and your depending on the factory computer to have the same calibration, even though there's well over 100 different calibrations now. The fuel and spark tables are all different. Then you get into codes, PC, if you stay in boost for longer than 30 seconds, you set the MAP HI code, which goes into a default map based off of TPS, this doesn't work, runs bad, detonates, breaks pistons and gaskets. Now your rebuilding motor. Some have tried a bypass loop around the MAP sensor so it doesn't see full boost, but this puts you in a lower load cell, which gives less fuel and more spark, which is dangerous. Some make it, and this can be based off your driving habits, maybe it's overly rich, could be early programming which is safe and cautious, maybe your propping and boat doesn't put much load on it, etc. Dustin |
Originally Posted by Whipple Charged
(Post 2767037)
A centrifugal is not more efficient, simply not true. If you compare size vs. size, the positive displacement always has a much broader curve so if you wanted to plot a usable rpm range for blower efficiency, the twin screw would be far higher.
Compressor efficiency is definately not a simple topic. For instance, conventional roots blowers can be very efficient at very low boost levels (~2-4psi), but who runs them there??? Yes, you are correct, if you look at the boost (efficiency??) over the torque curve, the whipple does look good, but it really depends on the application. I have a limited perspective on boat torque curves, but to date, I haven't been in a single boat where the torque below 3500rpm mattered all that much (the area where a whipple will produce more boost than a centrifugal). I've never seen an any data to indicate a whipple will have anywhere near the efficiency up top, especially at higher boost levels. You are correct about the tradeoff between before vs. after throttle. Any time the compressor is further up the air path, there will be some throttle response loss. I have never felt it was at all significant in a car. I'll have to rely on others as to whether it is objectional in a boat. I still think that most (including manufacturers) stick with roots type blowers because they look cool, as well as my statement that trying to package everything in the V compromises airflow and intake tunning, as well as intercooler efficiency more than one would think. Yes, you can always just "turn up the boost" but EVERYTHING works better when you can make the same power at lower boost. |
You said twin? You can’t put two superchargers in something dude unless it has two mo
Originally Posted by t500hps
(Post 2766333)
I bought my boat with twin 500EFI Procharged motors....M3SC at 8 PSI. They were reported to make 830hp, I talked to a shop that had set up a number of them on a dyno and claimed they would see about 790 out of that set-up....no way 5 PSI is making over 700 hp.
If you really spend the money to set each one up properly both should be reliable......this means putting the motor on a dyno and having it tuned properly....I also believe that the Procharger setup will take them longer to set up correctly. If you just bolt this stuf on and run it.....chances are the Procharger will grenade you motor twice as fast as the Whipple (might take a few years, but will hapen faster) |
Sheesh, I read thru most all of this thinking it all sounds familiar until I realized I read it 20 some years ago!
|
16 years actually
|
I know they work better with non carburetor applications that's Pro Chargers I'm talking about?
|
Originally Posted by Roxxo689
(Post 4909132)
you said twin? Are you talking about twin turbo? Cause I don’t think you can put two superchargers on something dude. You can put a supercharger and a turbo. It’s called twin charged when it has both. BMW has done it before. Then they have twin turbo which is two turbos.
. https://cimg0.ibsrv.net/gimg/www.off...e3eb10ba30.jpg . https://cimg6.ibsrv.net/gimg/www.off...198859a48d.png |
| All times are GMT -5. The time now is 04:22 PM. |
Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.