Whipple vs. Procharger
05-16-2011, 08:42 PM
#21
Registered
iTrader: (3)
Heres a question for you blower guys. A friend of mine just built some 522CI M4 or M5? intercooled procharger engines. They made like 1100HP on 10psi, with the edelbrock aluminum heads. However, at like 3200RPM, he was only making roughly 600HP or so. Then the boost came in, like a sledgehammer, and really starting making big power.
My question is, lets say he runs 1100hp a side, and needs some 36-38P props. How is that boat going to plane off, say trying to turn some 38p props while at 3000RPM or so trying to get on plane? Is it going to be a situation where the engines wont have the power to lay the boat over at that RPM, so in turn he will need to throttle down, and then send 900+ft lbs thru his drives while getting on plane?
The dyno numbers on some of the procharged stuff impresses me. I've only dealt with Roots style blowers, and while they don't make as much power, they do seem to be pretty darn reliable in the marine world. I am curious as to why builders like ZUL, Cheif, Potter, Wesco, Young, etc, still use roots and screw type blowers?
My question is, lets say he runs 1100hp a side, and needs some 36-38P props. How is that boat going to plane off, say trying to turn some 38p props while at 3000RPM or so trying to get on plane? Is it going to be a situation where the engines wont have the power to lay the boat over at that RPM, so in turn he will need to throttle down, and then send 900+ft lbs thru his drives while getting on plane?
The dyno numbers on some of the procharged stuff impresses me. I've only dealt with Roots style blowers, and while they don't make as much power, they do seem to be pretty darn reliable in the marine world. I am curious as to why builders like ZUL, Cheif, Potter, Wesco, Young, etc, still use roots and screw type blowers?
05-16-2011, 09:48 PM
#22
Registered
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Houston, TX, USA
Posts: 2,287
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I am current owner of both a M4 procharger boat and a boat with whipples. Both have interccolers. Procharger's boost goes up as rpm goes up. In my boat just off idle I can only get max of 2 lbs of boost. At WOT around 5600-5800 rpm's I am pulling 10 lbs of boost. Once on plane running 2000 rpm, if I nail the throttle, motor will go to 4k and then start climbing from there. Higher rpm, higher boost. I feel the low torque of the procharger at low rpm has helped make the bravo live. When planing I have to sit and wait for boat to gain enough speed/rpm/boost to get on plane with correct prop for max rpm.
Whipple motor, If I care to melt the bravo I can do right off idle by nailing the throttles. I can pull what ever boost to max, I want to right off idle. Whipple boat I have to remember to go lightly on throttles to help make bravo live. Never have problem having power to plane.
As far as engine cover, I now have had 3 boats I have had to raise engine hatch on. Each one I have raised enough to get the motor to clear without the cover looking like it has been raised up.
For engine life I would make sure you install an intercooler if you are looking for 800 hp unless you want to run race gas all the time.
Whipple motor, If I care to melt the bravo I can do right off idle by nailing the throttles. I can pull what ever boost to max, I want to right off idle. Whipple boat I have to remember to go lightly on throttles to help make bravo live. Never have problem having power to plane.
As far as engine cover, I now have had 3 boats I have had to raise engine hatch on. Each one I have raised enough to get the motor to clear without the cover looking like it has been raised up.
For engine life I would make sure you install an intercooler if you are looking for 800 hp unless you want to run race gas all the time.
05-16-2011, 10:12 PM
#23
Registered
Platinum MemberJoin Date: Mar 2008
Location: Vancouver BC
Posts: 1,181
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Heres a question for you blower guys. A friend of mine just built some 522CI M4 or M5? intercooled procharger engines. They made like 1100HP on 10psi, with the edelbrock aluminum heads. However, at like 3200RPM, he was only making roughly 600HP or so. Then the boost came in, like a sledgehammer, and really starting making big power.
My question is, lets say he runs 1100hp a side, and needs some 36-38P props. How is that boat going to plane off, say trying to turn some 38p props while at 3000RPM or so trying to get on plane? Is it going to be a situation where the engines wont have the power to lay the boat over at that RPM, so in turn he will need to throttle down, and then send 900+ft lbs thru his drives while getting on plane?
The dyno numbers on some of the procharged stuff impresses me. I've only dealt with Roots style blowers, and while they don't make as much power, they do seem to be pretty darn reliable in the marine world. I am curious as to why builders like ZUL, Cheif, Potter, Wesco, Young, etc, still use roots and screw type blowers?
My question is, lets say he runs 1100hp a side, and needs some 36-38P props. How is that boat going to plane off, say trying to turn some 38p props while at 3000RPM or so trying to get on plane? Is it going to be a situation where the engines wont have the power to lay the boat over at that RPM, so in turn he will need to throttle down, and then send 900+ft lbs thru his drives while getting on plane?
The dyno numbers on some of the procharged stuff impresses me. I've only dealt with Roots style blowers, and while they don't make as much power, they do seem to be pretty darn reliable in the marine world. I am curious as to why builders like ZUL, Cheif, Potter, Wesco, Young, etc, still use roots and screw type blowers?
Prochargers are gaining in popularity and I think you will see them becoming more mainstream. Procharger as a company did a really bad job early on with their kits and marketing and are still suffering from it, but their units are awesome. Lots of people have had a hard time making centrifiguls work because they applied old techniques and blamed the blower when it didn't work. Roots blowers look cool and make stout power no doubt but the ease of maintenance and longevity on the new centrifiguls as well as very cheap overhaul costs, multiple mounting configurations, better low speed driving characteristics, etc. make them tough to beat. Prochargers and EFI are the chit! Until turbos come in user friendly kits and kick everyones azz..
05-17-2011, 12:52 PM
#24
Registered
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Fresno, CA, 93722, USA
Posts: 1,436
Likes: 0
Received 4 Likes
on
4 Posts
05-17-2011, 01:08 PM
#25
Registered
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Fresno, CA, 93722, USA
Posts: 1,436
Likes: 0
Received 4 Likes
on
4 Posts
600hp at 3200rpm is about 1000lbs torque. I think he'll be ok getting on plane. I'm pretty sure you can remove one of the names from the list of "builders"
Prochargers are gaining in popularity and I think you will see them becoming more mainstream. Procharger as a company did a really bad job early on with their kits and marketing and are still suffering from it, but their units are awesome. Lots of people have had a hard time making centrifiguls work because they applied old techniques and blamed the blower when it didn't work. Roots blowers look cool and make stout power no doubt but the ease of maintenance and longevity on the new centrifiguls as well as very cheap overhaul costs, multiple mounting configurations, better low speed driving characteristics, etc. make them tough to beat. Prochargers and EFI are the chit! Until turbos come in user friendly kits and kick everyones azz..
Prochargers are gaining in popularity and I think you will see them becoming more mainstream. Procharger as a company did a really bad job early on with their kits and marketing and are still suffering from it, but their units are awesome. Lots of people have had a hard time making centrifiguls work because they applied old techniques and blamed the blower when it didn't work. Roots blowers look cool and make stout power no doubt but the ease of maintenance and longevity on the new centrifiguls as well as very cheap overhaul costs, multiple mounting configurations, better low speed driving characteristics, etc. make them tough to beat. Prochargers and EFI are the chit! Until turbos come in user friendly kits and kick everyones azz..
When you add the proper ECM calibrations, fuel systems, etc., the kits are the same price as ours. How about resale of the boats, talk to any boat dealer or mfg and they run from a boat that has a PC on it, can't hardly sale them.
How can a company claim to be "pro's" or "experts" when they can't even offer a proper PCM calibration? I can list hundreds of issues just on 496's alone, let alone 500hp, 502 mag's....... In most cases, PC doesn't even have knock protection because its off in the factory cals.
When its carb motors, if you got a good carb setup guy for a blow through, then they can work pretty good, but on the EFI side, there light years behind and should be held accountable for selling systems that literally have very little chance of success! Big intercoolers can't fix ignorance. Computer controlled fuel injected motors need to work WITH the SC, not against it.
05-17-2011, 01:15 PM
#26
I had the pleasure of being in the same houseboat dock for 2 years with the owner of ATI (Poorcharger) 3 seasons ago in Missouri. I have a very hard time accepting the fact that the system even remotely works after a few conversations with him. Hiring help that is smarter than you has to be a company motto.
05-17-2011, 01:17 PM
#27
Bad job in marketing? Maybe it was the fact that they supply EFI kits with "FMU's" and one-way check valves to trick the PCM to not set MAP HI codes. Come on, the one thing Procharger has done is created a market for tuners to fix all there issues. The SC's themselves make power, but the quality of the kit componets, welded aluminum intercoolers and lack of any EFI support has been the crutch.
When you add the proper ECM calibrations, fuel systems, etc., the kits are the same price as ours. How about resale of the boats, talk to any boat dealer or mfg and they run from a boat that has a PC on it, can't hardly sale them.
How can a company claim to be "pro's" or "experts" when they can't even offer a proper PCM calibration? I can list hundreds of issues just on 496's alone, let alone 500hp, 502 mag's....... In most cases, PC doesn't even have knock protection because its off in the factory cals.
When its carb motors, if you got a good carb setup guy for a blow through, then they can work pretty good, but on the EFI side, there light years behind and should be held accountable for selling systems that literally have very little chance of success! Big intercoolers can't fix ignorance. Computer controlled fuel injected motors need to work WITH the SC, not against it.
When you add the proper ECM calibrations, fuel systems, etc., the kits are the same price as ours. How about resale of the boats, talk to any boat dealer or mfg and they run from a boat that has a PC on it, can't hardly sale them.
How can a company claim to be "pro's" or "experts" when they can't even offer a proper PCM calibration? I can list hundreds of issues just on 496's alone, let alone 500hp, 502 mag's....... In most cases, PC doesn't even have knock protection because its off in the factory cals.
When its carb motors, if you got a good carb setup guy for a blow through, then they can work pretty good, but on the EFI side, there light years behind and should be held accountable for selling systems that literally have very little chance of success! Big intercoolers can't fix ignorance. Computer controlled fuel injected motors need to work WITH the SC, not against it.
05-17-2011, 01:54 PM
#28
3500hp has been made many times with our A980 and PSI C and D combo's. Yet, they have 50+psi at the hit of throttle. Why deal with the lag, if so, go turbo and make 4500hp! Not sure how thats any comparison. The new race SC's were finishing will generate another 300-500hp over current competition. New rotor profile and rotor technology.
05-17-2011, 05:40 PM
#29
Registered
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 206
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
In reading articles about Whipplechargers many years ago, I thought that the big advantage was that they were the most efficient compressors available. I.E. they take less HP to compress a given amount of air, and cause less heat buildup in doing it. Keep in mind that Whipple did not invent this device- he got it from a Swiss or Swedish company that built them for use in refrigeration. He adapted them for use in engines.
If you look at the recent generation of A/C compressors for residential use, the better / more expensive / more efficient models use scroll type compressors. Looking at this further, I find that Lysholm/Eaton partnered in this after the split or SRM from Opcon (the swedish company) and the Eaton supercharger (same as the Whipple it seems) is used in many GM cars. I have never seen a centrigufal SC used in a OEM application, so that tends to call into question its cost-effectiveness.
Disclaimer- I do not own a SC boat at this time, but have an Eaton equiped car.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scroll_compressor
If you look at the recent generation of A/C compressors for residential use, the better / more expensive / more efficient models use scroll type compressors. Looking at this further, I find that Lysholm/Eaton partnered in this after the split or SRM from Opcon (the swedish company) and the Eaton supercharger (same as the Whipple it seems) is used in many GM cars. I have never seen a centrigufal SC used in a OEM application, so that tends to call into question its cost-effectiveness.
Disclaimer- I do not own a SC boat at this time, but have an Eaton equiped car.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scroll_compressor
Last edited by dogturd21; 05-17-2011 at 05:43 PM.
05-17-2011, 06:09 PM
#30
Registered
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Fresno, CA, 93722, USA
Posts: 1,436
Likes: 0
Received 4 Likes
on
4 Posts
In reading articles about Whipplechargers many years ago, I thought that the big advantage was that they were the most efficient compressors available. I.E. they take less HP to compress a given amount of air, and cause less heat buildup in doing it. Keep in mind that Whipple did not invent this device- he got it from a Swiss or Swedish company that built them for use in refrigeration. He adapted them for use in engines.
If you look at the recent generation of A/C compressors for residential use, the better / more expensive / more efficient models use scroll type compressors. Looking at this further, I find that Lysholm/Eaton partnered in this after the split or SRM from Opcon (the swedish company) and the Eaton supercharger (same as the Whipple it seems) is used in many GM cars. I have never seen a centrigufal SC used in a OEM application, so that tends to call into question its cost-effectiveness.
Disclaimer- I do not own a SC boat at this time, but have an Eaton equiped car.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scroll_compressor
If you look at the recent generation of A/C compressors for residential use, the better / more expensive / more efficient models use scroll type compressors. Looking at this further, I find that Lysholm/Eaton partnered in this after the split or SRM from Opcon (the swedish company) and the Eaton supercharger (same as the Whipple it seems) is used in many GM cars. I have never seen a centrigufal SC used in a OEM application, so that tends to call into question its cost-effectiveness.
Disclaimer- I do not own a SC boat at this time, but have an Eaton equiped car.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scroll_compressor
We did not invent, but we have certainly pioneered the use. We've also come out with our own designs including new profiles. Previous generations were units that we helped develop but did not mfg. We did pay for Lysholm's original development.
Lysholm and Eaton partnered for the Ford GT program and a failed attempt at supplying Mercedes SC'd vehicles. Lysholm went bankrupt last year.
Our SC has no common componets of an Eaton or a Lysholm. Every componet is different in one way or another.
Every SC has its own key features and applications, so its difficult to compare. But when testing compressors of equal flow capacity, the twin screw always has higher total AE, not by much, but it is in fact higher. The centrifugal have slightly better thermal efficiency but take more power to drive. This is not he said, she said, this is the facts. The rest is about the "package". If the system or package isn't the correct fit, then its not going to produce optimal performance, goes both ways.
