Supercharger Shootout
 

I have often wondered if one of the boating magazines would ever try to publish a supercharger shootout article. About the only format that I could see working is "run whatcha brung, but here's the sealed HP500 spec engine and 92 octane fuel that you have to use." I don't care what blower you use, what fuel delivery system, or what boost level is achieved. Whoever makes the most power without detonation wins.

Competitors would be expected to bring a combo which is already dyno tuned. No thrashing the sealed HP500 used for the shootout. You get one day to install and "fine tune" your combo. Then you get to pull the lever three times for the competition. Your result is the average of those three pulls.

Relatively long duration dyno pulls will test the performance of intercooling. The use of excess fuel delivery to cool the charge will show up in the BSFC numbers. No water injection allowed.

I have seen many threads lately asking which supercharger is the best. Here's the answer. By looking at dyno results, fuel consumption, cost and complexity of each system the consumer can decide which one suits them best.

Years ago one of the car magazines did this but they got all caught up in trying to keep boost levels constant between competitors. Boost doesn't matter in a test like this. The true limit to performance is detonation. You do whatever you want as long as the engine doesn't detonate on 92 octane on a long dyno pull.

What do you think guys?

Another rule is to run motor at wot for 2+ minutes straight. Or more points for keeping at wot the longest with out motor damage.

Before & after running engine do leak down test on motor.

I like the idea of this.............I also like the full throttle idea. Running for just a few seconds is not a true test of an engines capabilities ! Often, we run engines at WOT for long periods of time.

RJ !

this is a great idea! Now how do we get them to do it! :D

Maybe if we keep this thread open & close to the top some lurkers from some magazines (Hot Boat, F&PB, Powerboat, Poker Run, Truckin, & who ever I forgot, we know you are out there) will take this on.

I like WOT tell they blow :D:D First off the carnage could be awsome. That is how Merc does it at the lake right :D:D

Jon

Good comments. Two minutes at WOT would tell us a lot. The dyno would have to be equipped with a water tank and pump dedicated to the intercooler. The pump would have to be capable of maintaining a constant pressure of maybe 20 psi in front of the intercooler. This amount of water pressure is easily available in a boat (at say 75F). With this variable under control we can see the benefit of bigger and/or more efficient intercoolers.

The test engine would have to be equipped with a knock sensor. If you trigger the sensor your test is over and you have to detune a bit before proceeding. It's not fair to wreck the engine before others get a chance. Leakdowns are a good idea too.

All the factors that people talk about when comparing superchargers are reduced to HP by this dyno shootout. You might have the best compressor efficiency, but too many intake path restrictions. You might have the lowest drive HP required, but poor cooling effectiveness. You might have the most compact layout but poor cylinder to cylinder fuel distribution requiring overly rich fuel metering. Doesn't matter, the system with the best overall performance in all these areas will produce the most HP and be the winner.

Whats the use of a knock sensor, there are no aftermarket knock sensors with any true accuracy. We've run 500's at 10minutes WOT on our dyno. We use cylinder pressure transducers in every cylinder, wide range air fuel sensors in every cylinder, as well as wide range air fuel sensors in the collector, EGT's are there for reference only. Theres also a CO2 sensor to backup the readings. We run all long dyno runs for accurate power readings as well as accurate tuning. I know for a fact that very few of my competitors even come close to this type of testing. No marine aftermarket company has anything close to this technology. THere are very few dynos around (available to the public) that can run at that level and maintain all the water flows and temps.

Dustin

Sounds like a great idea!

I`d love to be a part of the team for sure.

Tom, how`s things going with your project?

Kurt

Dustin:

I may be misinterpreting your post, but it doesn't sound like you are too keen on the idea. However, you make some good points, and I agree that:

1) We should use OEM knock sensors that are accurate
2) We should run the tests for as long as it takes to stabilize temperature
3) We should find a dyno that is capable of hosting this event
4) We should expect the Whipplecharger team to show up with a very well prepared entry

If you can tune each individual cylinder closer to the edge with your technology, then you have an advantage, but I'm sure other supercharger companies would also show up well prepared.

Kurt:

This would be a hell of an event to participate in and read about. Loyal customers will always find a reason to stick with their brand, but undecided buyers would learn a lot to help them with their decision.

Maybe we should talk to Warren about this idea. It has some risks for all concerned, including the magazine that sponsors it, but "Supercharger Shootout" in big letters on the cover is almost as eyecatching as "Swimsuit Special". :D

I like the idea, its ok for all of these blower companies to make all of these claims. SO WY DONT THEY BACK THEM UP?

Or what was Loyal to make the change.

It does sound like a good idea, and I agree with the parameters of the test.
92 octane
if you knock you're done. Period!

One thing that should be mentioned however, everything in the test kit must be in a "Joe T Public" kit. Nothing exotic.
Sometimes you have to get technical.:)

DAVE

I would like to see this type of test done with and without intercoolers. I think that would really give us a good comparison of the blower performance and then we can all see if one manufacturers chiller design is better than another. I personally have no experience with fuel injection and would like to see the tests done on carbuerated applications. It would be a cool test. Just my opinion on the above!
Craig.

tomcat, I don't mind the test, your paying the bill. If you want to test blowers, we can run them on a blower dyno. If you want to test "packages" then you buy something off the shelf and install it per specs given, then test. Dyno will only show a few things while there are thousands of things that go into each system that makes it a good product or bad.

Dustin

TomCat

I think it's a great idea, but I don't see how it would work. If you want to test to see who can make the most power (safely) on a given package you would have to set it up (to be fair) that they couldn't modify anything below the intake manifold. This is the only way to test apples to apples. What happens if you can make the most power on an HP500 and live, but to do this you need to make a few cylinder head modifications, ignition, and say a firing order change. No way to go back to stock set up for the next engine.

I think a better way to do it would be like the engine masters challenge that PHR puts on. Set up certain parimeters, and go from there. Some of the things to look at would be:
Cubic inches, type of cylinder heads, ignition etc.
Now you can set up your testing parimeters. All engines must run on 89 octane, run @ W.O.T. for 25 Minutes, then you can put each package into the same hull, and do idle quality, acceleration, cruise, economy, and top end testing. And lastly a complete engine tear down and inpsection.

I would bet if you took a poll of the most common packages you could come up with specs pretty easy. I would also think getting one of the magazines involved and some engine builders involved would be pretty simple also.


Doug

Those are more good comments guys.

RumRunner - By sealed engine I mean no changes whatsoever allowed to the long block. The intake manifold is a Dart single plane, and unless the kit available to Joe Public includes a different intake manifold you're not allowed to change it either. As far as testing engines in the same boat, a boat is just a dyno, but it introduces additional variables such as weather, prop selection, weight and trim. Let's stick to the dyno shootout idea for now. If a magazine wanted to sponsor and publish that alone I'd be happy.

Dave F - The "kit" sometimes doesn't include everything. Sometimes there are things left out for the sake of a low price that you really can't do without. For example, a kit that performs better with a V-6 module, or with cooling system modifications or with a reprogrammed ECM or with a modified carb. To address this issue, if the manufacturer shows up with a kit that includes these options, then the reported price of the kit will be the price "as tested". This will also help buyers recognize the true cost of the kit.

Wette Vette - It is easy to turn the water off and on. There isn't much additional HP with water on, but the charge air temperature drops a little or a lot depending on the intercooler. Both carb and EFI applications would be welcome to the shootout.

Dustin - We already know that the compressors have different efficiencies. The objective of the shootout is to test the complete package installed with whatever components are available to Joe Public. Then tune that package to the maximum.

The dyno will show the torque and HP curves, charge air temperature, EGTs and BSFC. Other features of the different kits that provide certain advantages and benefits to the customer can be highlighted by the manufacturer. If I was a magazine writer I would expect to include this information in an article.

So what is the motor? Hp500 carb

Contestants?
1) Whipple with integreted intercooler in the manifold
2) Procharger with carb in the box
3) Vortech with carb in the box
4) Nickerson B+M with single and dual carb
5) ?others

While at it why not do the exhaust on stock and modified motor.
1) Gil
2) CMI elbow top
3) CMI full tube
4) Eichert full length caast
5) EMI
6) IMCO powerflow and thunder
7) Dana products
8) stainless marine
9) stock mercruiser
10) stock mercruiser with SS elbow top

$15k motor, $25K superchargers, $25K exhaust,
plus dyno time or boat time $10k.

OK so who's writing the checks?

I picked the HP500 as the "mule" but they are expensive. Any 502-509 CID with stock, cast iron, rectangular port heads and a mild hydraulic roller cam would be acceptable as the base engine. No ported or aluminum cylinder heads, custom cams or different compression. The HP numbers achieved in the test have to be simlar to what Joe Public can expect by bolting a kit onto his stock engine.

As far as organizing and paying, the magazines do this all the time. Westech Performance seems to do a lot of dyno testing on new products for magazine articles, often using brand new crate engines as the mule. I don't know who pays them; the magazine or the manufacturer. They need to get paid somehow, but the magazine exposure is worth something too.

Manufacturers that enter the contest would supply and install their own kits. A visual inspection would be made to ensure that the kits are the same as available to Joe Public. The magazine exposure is well worth the cost of participating.

There would be two main applications. A participant could enter one or both:

1) Carb
2) EFI

There are three main types of blowers (and manufacturers):

1)Roots
2)Centrifugal
3)Screw compressor

Since the magazines are on the west coast and so are a lot of the manufacturers we could assume the testing will be done on the west coast. Participants could be a manufacturer or a supplier/installer/engine builder. Possible contestants include:

Carb

1) Roots

There are a lot of Roots manufacturers, so the magazine might have to be selective. I would expect to see someone like the Blower Shop enter this contest with their new intercooler.

2) Centrifugal

Procharger has been selling carb kits for years. Vortech should be there too, once they make an intercooler available for their carb kit.

3) Screw compressor

Whipplecharger should be there. I don't know if PSI has anything for this engine size/HP range.

EFI

1) Roots

I don't know if this is a combination that Joe Public is likely to purchase, but any participant in the Roots carb group could just swap throttle bodies and pull the lever.

2) Centrifugal

Procharger and Vortech are the main players here, but Livorsi could enter with their Vortech based kit and their own intercooler. PFM could enter with their Procharger based TBI/Superchiller kit. There may be others like Energized Fuel Injection who could enter with their Vortech based PFM tube chiller kit.

3) Screw compressor

Whipplecharger may have this category to themselves.


The format is "run whatcha brung" but the emphasis on maximum, long duration HP pretty well excludes small Roots blowers and non-intercooled kits. This helps to keep the contest down to a manageable size. Exhaust manifolds and in-water testing are out for the same reason. One little complication is the need to have a 502 MPI intake and ECM harness to install on the engine for the EFI centrifugal category.

Laying out the contest like this you can see that there can be winners declared in each category, as well as an overall winner. Joe Public (we) will love this.

I think it's a fantastic idea Tom!

Turbo chargers
 

Can turbo chargers play to? Sounds like a lot of fun.
Tom

contact lake racer with extreme magazine (art) see if would like to do this sounds right up his alley they are the guys that want to make a differnce in this boating industry

A few problems, first, this is clearly at least a week of dyno testing and 2-3 people working on it full time, adjusting, changing fuel routing for each system, different routing for BSFC on each system, etc so even somebody like Westech, who has a great testing facility, have to be compensated for there time and I doubt free press will be enough for this type of work. Remember, it's hard for smaller companies to get anything else accomplished when there working on a project of this magnitude.

Some things to think about:
If an engine is not stock, then which way is it modified, each direction will favor one over another, whether it's cam profile, head runner size, etc., how is this kept to a standard?

What about boost psi? Some work better at certain boost levels and therefore a standard stock engine would not be a clear representation of all of the products mentioned.

How does carburated represent everybodies product? Doing 2 systems from each mfg just gets even more costly. It's also more difficult, if there dependent on stand alone ECU's, who maps them, what method do they use, who will pay for each ECU system? If you want stock (ex. 502 Mag MPI or 500HP EFI), then you need all the stock electronics including the ECU. Obviously, Procharger, Vortech and us all build "kits" where there suppose to be bolt on. This is basically for EFI only because there are only a handful of motors that don't need re-jetting from naturally aspirated vs. supercharged. If were talking EFI, then it should be a package that somebody offers, Procharger does not reflash stock ECU's so should they be allowed to send a modified ECU done by somebody else, it's not there practice? The product should represent what companies are selling. Whipple, Vortech and basically everybody else modify the ECU. Procharger supplies a FMU with typically a 15lb window from high to low, what level is it tested at and reported?

Peak hp should not be the key componet as thats a very little componet in the "overall" equation. There should be a score on a few things such as fitment, packaging, appearance, total power (entire rpm range), drive-ability, idle, noise, etc. If your only testing for the best "overall" blower or just for the one with the highest peak efficiency, that should be done on a blower dyno and nothing else. If your testing packages, everything should be evaluated. When measuring total power gained, you should average from idle to redline. Some will give 50% more just on top at peak rpm while others will generate over 50% down low and whatever on top (positive dispacement).

Who supplies the base engine? This is a sticky situation, if it fails, who pays for it? What if it's not from the product on top, part failure, who assumes the cost? What if dyno operator kills it, whos liable? 2 minutes WOT on a brand new GM "crate" engine is not very wise. It will need a few hours of break in time before it can endure that type of test. I would recommend 30-60 second accel test over a 3500rpm range, 2000-5500rpm (depends on cam given).

After each test, the engine must be put back to stock configuration and retested in stock form, as the power will vary after run time and what others have done in previous testing.

Once again, how are you measuring knock? Nobody makes an affordable knock meter for aftermarket, it's simply not available. The adjustable meters have very little accuracy to show level 1 detonation. There are 3 levels, it's not even accurate at level 3 knock which is audible. So if you want true knock detection, you need far more sophisticated knock detection equipment than what most have available. Too let you know, you can burn a valve or piston before detonation so detonation should not be the only factor.

Tom brings up a good point, what about turbos? Are we testing packages because nobody makes a turbo "package" for marine/gasoline engine that are just bolt on (that I'm aware of). There are many parts available and many that do turbos, but there not typically bolt on packages, does that matter? Tom, I've always said that when the turbo system is done correctly, there is no peak hp comparison, turbos when designed for the proper type of application are by far the most efficient force induction methods available. They will easily win the peak hp test if designed properly. So again, does that represent that it's the best product?

Thanks,
Dustin

Tomcat, to let you know, PSI does not have anything smaller, they have only the one unit with a few different variations. If you want to test blowers of that size, we've had one for 10 years that is bigger and better, it would certainly show very well in any test of big hp.

Dustin

Sounds like this is getting way too many variables and loop holes.
Why not make it simple.
Pick a stock application that the blower manufactures make a kit for i.e. 502efi. From what I hear these manufactures claim they have bolt on kits so it should be pretty straight forward.

1. Dyno base engine with stock exhaust.
2. Bolt on kit as manufacture instructions indicate. Note any difficulties in installation.
3. Dyno with kit, no tweeking aloud remember these are suppose to be bolt on kits. Measure HP and Torque curve through entire range.
4. Run endurance test, i.e. 5, 10 or 15 minutes what ever someone thinks is a good test at WOT.
5. Remove kit and pull heads to check for detonation.

Keep it simple!

I agree with "rv"...keep it simple!
 

However, I would say NOT using an EFI, but rather a stock engine with a carb only. My reasoning is; wouldn't the ECU of an EFI or MPI be too easy to modify or "cheat" with to get an edge over the other competitors ECU's??? Put a STOCK HOLLEY boost ref carb on the engine being tested---where only carb size, jetting, power valves can be changed. The Merc 500HP would probably be a good choice for this.

It's just an idea----I just wanted to show the flip side of a carbed engine vs a fuel injected engine. :)

This is starting to get like drafting legislation! More good comments though.

1) Likely two weeks of dyno time would be needed, but installing the kit is the participant's job. That way you're not tieing up the shop's people. Also, no one can say that the installation wasn't done right.

2) It sounds like we should use a stock 502 MPI engine. Carb kits could be done more easily by removing the EFI from a 502 MPI than vice versa (adding MPI to a carb engine). The stock Mercury dual plane intake would be the base manifold for carb kits.

If stock compression is a little too high for Roots blowers, it limits the boost they can run, but that's a fact in the stock bolt-on situation. We are not changing pistons or heads.

3) If a kit includes a reflashed ECU then bring it. If not then either don't use one or the cost is added to the "price as tested".
Will participants bring a more aggressive ECU than they might include in a kit? Probably, but that is common in dyno tests isn't it. "Here's your big number, now jet up a couple sizes to be safe." If an FMU is set for peak HP, will we know on the dyno that the idle is poor? Maybe.

4) If a participant only wants to enter one of EFI or carb, that's fine. We would still see a comparison between blower types within that one group.

5) Particpants will bring their own carbs already jetted for supercharging. You can't run stock carbs so there is no way around this loophole. Blowthrough carbs especially need to be modified. The cost of the kit will be increased by the cost of these carbs. And by cost we mean what it costs to buy it already modified from someone like Nickerson. Don't tell Joe Public to buy a carb and then spend all summer trying to get it jetted properly; that's not bolt-on.

Since Roots and Screw compressors come with their own intakes in the kit, centrifugal guys can bring a substitute intake. (They may think a single plane intake has fuel distribution advantages.) But the cost must be added to the price. No porting allowed on the intakes.

6) This is a dyno test and readers would tend to focus on peak HP, but graphic comparisons of torque curves and average HP over a wide range of RPM are common reporting techniques in such articles. Scoring the other features of the kit would be subjective, but any advantages and benefits of those features could certainly be discussed in the article.

7) Supply of a fresh base engine and liability for repairs would be carried by the magazine. Keeping the engine out of detonation is ultimately the dyno operator's job. If the magazine and the dyno shop can't agree on these terms then there will be no test.

8) rv is right, we need to keep it simple, but nothing is ever simple, and nothing worth doing is ever easy. Have you read the rules for PHR's Engine Masters competition in this month's issue?

Maybe we need a no tweaking rule or a time limit for testing. If you gamble and show up with too lean a carb or too agressive an ECU program, and the dyno operator has to pull out of the run because of problems, you lose. But that really seems too harsh. Joe public wants to know what these systems will do with the best combination of pulley size, fuel and timing. Then he wants to phone the manufacturer and order that combination. That's "bolt-on."

9) This is a test of supercharger kits. If there is a bolt-on turbosupercharger kit out there, and the manufacturer wants to take part, why not?

Dustin:

You're worrying too much! Someone reading between the lines might think that you are concerned about losing the peak HP test. But as you said, that's not the only thing that matters. I would expect the magazine to do a little writeup on the features and advantages of each system at the beginning of the article, and then summarize the results within that context at the end of the article. Your story would be told.

Engines are tested and tuned on dynos all the time without the benefit of the best knock sensor you describe. That's one reason for adding jet before the engine leaves the shop, so the customer doesn't have a problem. Is this ideal? No, but the alternative is to say that only a few people in the country can dyno engines and that just isn't true.

Since the participants would know that the engine was going to be run on the dyno for minutes rather than seconds they would jet it up to be safe. No one will want to be the participant that destroys the engine.

I think we have beat this to death. IF a magazine wants to sponsor and publish a Supercharger Shootout, they will be making the rules and I'm sure they would welcome input from all potential participants before proceeding.

Thanks to all for your comments. I think it has really improved the idea to thrash it out here. OK you editor types lurking out there in cyberspace, take it away!

Tom

tomcat, well your reading invisible print if thats what your getting. I'm the only supercharger mfg here lending any support or information and basically the only mfg here (on OSO) that would be competing, if I was worried about our product, I surely wouldn't be broadcasting all our info and all my contact info all over the internet, that would be fatal. I'm giving you real or potential problems that you would have with the test you submitted. No company will jump at such a test without knowing all the criteria's first.

As for other people dynoing, it's a fact that very few have proper equipment to sense for proper air fuel ratios or true detonation, anybody can buy a dyno and run it. Adding a jet to make it safe? In some cases, that may do zip! Many don't have proper dyno's to "simulate" a boat run, some can't run the water cooled headers, etc.

If you think a publishing company is going to assume all liability, I've got some Nerbraskan ocean front property I would love to put sale ya! When they test boats, the boat mfg or the company representing the test assume the risk of damage, an engine would be the same. Also, I wouldn't want a bunch of people coming in and out of our place, using our tools, congesting our dyno for two weeks. But hey, if you can find them, meet everybodies criteria, I'll be there. But because your talking about a supercharger shootout which to the public will be a representation of all superchargers (meaning every system one offers), then security and criterias need to be met, your talking years of negative press for the ones that dont win, yet it may not be a direct representation of all the products. See your assuming no risk, while Whipple, Vortech, Procharger, Blower Shop, Littlefield, Holley, Imco, CMI, Dana, Gil, Stellings, etc. assume all.

Thanks,
Dustin

Just do water testing.
 

Most Joe Public guys are going to buy these kits and many of them won't even pull their engines to do the installation. I would like to see each kit installed on HP500 motors to the manufacturers recommendations and then run on the lake with a radar gun. The same boat must be used with the same set-up and baseline HP500 speeds. Use the stalker gun with the acceleration computer and publish the curves and best top end speeds. Then compare system costs and come up with the BEST system and the most bang for the dollar. Bravo 1 non labbed props of any pitch can be used, and the same prop must be used for the acceleration as for the top end tests. Whipple, Nickerson, Pro Charger, Vortech, and any other manufacturer or builder who has a "BOLT ON PACKAGE" can be used. I think that would give Mr. Public some good insight on ease of installation, cost and some performance expectations from each package in terms of top speed and acceleration. To much BS with the dyno in my 02.

Dustin - I think you hit the nail on the head when you said "years of negative press for the ones that don't win." That's the real problem. I'm not thinking like a manufacturer because I'm more of a scientist in my day job, and scientists are all about running the experiment and seeing what happens. We don't worry too much about the consequences.

I have been around long enough to see magazines host supercharger shootouts, intake manifold shootouts, exhaust manifold shootouts, cam shootouts, even nitrous shootouts. I can remember at least two nitrous articles where the magazine deliberately kept increasing the nitrous level until the engine expired. So recognizing and accepting the risks is nothing new.

There must be other dynos besides yours that are capable of conducting these tests. Arizona Speed and Marine, Lingenfelter Performance Engineering, Gale Banks etc.

Wette Vette - Making the comparisons in a boat has the same types of problems and risks. Each installation takes at least a day, so different systems would be tested on different days. We all know what a difference a day can make on the lake. At least on the dyno you can correct for different weather conditions. And wasn't there a test like this in a magazine recently where chine walk with the increased power levels screwed up the test?

My final thought on the matter. Factory class racing is an ongoing shootout the puts different manufacturers' hull designs to the test, with equal power from a sealed spec engine. It is a much less "controlled" experiment, compared to a dyno shootout. Factory class racing is more difficult to regulate, and is definitely influenced by driver skill and Murphy's Law. It costs a lot to race and stuff gets wrecked, but winners are declared, articles are published and Joe Public loves it.

In their advertising everyone claims to be the best. Racing results are used to support these claims. And even though winning the Factory class does not mean you have the best overall boat, it provides useful input for the potential buyer of a high performance boat. The race was run in the light of day, the sanctioning body does their best to prevent cheating and the result is clear to all. That's why so many manufacturers are there, despite the risk and cost.

Manufacturers of engines, engine components and power adders also claim to be the best in their advertising, and dyno results are often used to support these claims. But for Joe Public, their is no way to know if the dyno results quoted in advertising are legit. They were not "sanctioned", if you will. Sometimes magazines see fit to shift into the "Consumer Reports" mode and conduct an independent test of these products.

To get back to the intent of my original post on this thread, all I'm saying is that there is a need for such a test to validate the claims made for marine supercharger kits.

Thanks,

Tom

Good points on the water testing!
 

Different days will make for different results. Obviously the tests would have to be don in a hull that has the capability to handle the expected top speeds. How about water testing while also putting each set-up on a propshaft dyno so the actual and corrected torque and HP can be measured. (not to tune the motor) Then off to the lake for water testing. Nothing tests the durability of a motor package like running sustained WOT in a boat for a few minutes. All of these would be cool tests, but I doubt we will ever see it happen without some technicalities.

It depends on what info were talking about, none of them have 6-wire wide band air fuel sensors in every port or cylinder pressure analysis systems, were talking over $200,000 worth of equipment. All mentioned have dynos and could run the test I'm sure, that wasn't the question, it's if knock was the true judge, then the only way to test that is with the most accurate of systems. EGT's only tell one side of a story and there's far more going on than just temp.

You mention being somewhat of a scientist, which I consider myself, I stay many of nights running the dyno, trying new procedures, trying to crack a problem, etc. Some throw things together, run it on an engine and let it go, sale, sale, sale. Were not like that but I'm not sure why I'm preaching to you, oh well, maybe somebody is listening :D

Wette vettes idea is much more "feasible." Cats are the best test beds because they don't usually have all the problems with handling.
Dustin

Why Try To Settle It on the Dyno
 

Put the superchargers/blowers on and run them. I could care less what some magazine tells me about anything. Everyone I have ever read or subscribed to is biased, period. I have had good results with several different types of superchargers and find it difficult to put one over the other in different circumstances. Every motor, boat ,drive , prop, etc, is different and so are dyno's. Put the stuff on and bring it on, who cares who makes it. This is just another post that will never have a happy ending and tick a bunch of people off. Everyone has a personal preference based on experience or word of mouth, not some magazine or shootout.

i don't know, but if you ask me, i'd say we just had the first phase of the shoot-out (description and explanation of equipment to be used). extra points for: attention to engineering details, costumer/NON-costumer service & public availability.

in my mind i have a clear winner.

uhmmm..........lets see.......who came in second :confused:

:cool:

So, was any of this idea acted on?

This test should only be done with kits that any boater can buy. Kits made for the specific test engine. That way your testing a companies package, not just the blower unit itself.

Oops, I didn't realize the age of this thread.

I think this would be a great idea. I am interested in supercharging my motors and can't quite make a decision.
but an article like this could definitely help me make a decision.:evilb::cool-smiley-027:

This thread is almost 5 years old, so I doubt its gonna happen anytime soon.

griff, I realize how old the thread is, that's why I asked if it ever happened.
Didn't Hotrod mag , or one of the car books do something similar? I wonder if Hotboat would be intrested now that they have new owners and managment. It seems like the type of article that would go with their name.