Supercharged HP vs N/A HP

[Stopsign32v]

Originally Posted by 04azuremach

At a vacuum? It's just an accessory at that point. Like throwing on a second alternator. The more pressure in the manifold, the harder it is to turn the impeller against that force... but at a vacuum, how is there any extra load?

I never said at cruising it put alot of load on the motor, I just said it put more load on the motor than N/A or a turbo. The supercharger will ALWAYS take power.

[ASH302]

Originally Posted by 04azuremach

This thread is about the durability of motors here. OP said nothing about peak power so the next time you pull something from your butt, try to at least remember what you ate so you know where it came from.

D@MN,

ASh

[na svt]

Originally Posted by txmach302

my thoughts on this is that your going to spend more money on a high HP n/a set up compare to a F/I car.

Very true.

A 450rwhp FI engine will last longer than a 450rwhp n/a combo. The reason is that the n/a combo will have to pushed to the limit (compression and RPM) to make the power while a FI combo can make 450 at low RPM and low boost. The n/a combo also requires a trans that can shift at high RPMs and steep gears, adding cost and reducing driveability.

[NeverEnuff]

^ I like NA..you know that...

[ASH302]

Originally Posted by na svt

Very true.

A 450rwhp FI engine will last longer than a 450rwhp n/a combo. The reason is that the n/a combo will have to pushed to the limit (compression and RPM) to make the power while a FI combo can make 450 at low RPM and low boost. The n/a combo also requires a trans that can shift at high RPMs and steep gears, adding cost and reducing driveability.

that is true, on the driveablility part for sure, i know each person has there thing, if someone wants to go n/a then go n/a if someone wants to go f/i then go f/i. its there money and there ride,

ASh

[na svt]

Originally Posted by txmach302

that is true, on the driveablility part for sure, i know each person has there thing, if someone wants to go n/a then go n/a if someone wants to go f/i then go f/i. its there money and there ride,

ASh

Amen brother!

[XSELLR8]

Originally Posted by na svt

Very true.

A 450rwhp FI engine will last longer than a 450rwhp n/a combo. The reason is that the n/a combo will have to pushed to the limit (compression and RPM) to make the power while a FI combo can make 450 at low RPM and low boost. The n/a combo also requires a trans that can shift at high RPMs and steep gears, adding cost and reducing driveability.

very good point. This is what I was trying to learn more about. I knew that a boosted engine should run lower compression, but I didn't think about how that would be a "less wear" factor under normal driving. I think it's a draw with the two engines - boosted has more pressure on the crank, but n/a is maxed out from getting there..and the lower peak power for supercharged is good to think about too. All very interesting.. two different animals indeed.

[halemach1]

Originally Posted by 04azuremach

This thread is about the durability of motors here. OP said nothing about peak power so the next time you pull something from your butt, try to at least remember what you ate so you know where it came from.

ok, i ment no disrespect in what i said. i wanted to say more but time did not allow it. if you want to talk about cruzing, if you have a 450hp n/a car, 450hp charged car, and a 450 hp turbo car, which engine experiences more stress cruzing at 2000 rpm? all be about the same right? would wear out about the same pace? that is why i didn't think cruzing should have been brought up. just what i think, i could be wrong. i do not know alot about this, but am trying to learn.

to me the differences in stress would occur at WOT, or peak power. i would think a 450hp n/a or turbo motor's internal components (pistons, rods, crank, bearing, ect.) would experience 450hp load on them. as opposed to a 450hp charged motors internals would experience (just a guess) 500hp to 550hp load.

the op posted about the stock mach motors capabilities. N/A vs. FI. kinda of a bad comparison because the stock motor N/A will never make BIG power because of the compression. but lets say, hypothetically you built a 1000hp N/A capable 32v 4.6 and a 1000hp FI capable 32v 4.6, but put the stock mach rods back in them (making them the weak link). start upping the boost on the charged motor, and start spinning the N/A motor higher and higher. which would make more power before one through a rod?? i would say the N/A one, but i have a feeling i'm about to learn something. lol

[04azuremach]

Originally Posted by halemach1

ok, i ment no disrespect in what i said. i wanted to say more but time did not allow it. if you want to talk about cruzing, if you have a 450hp n/a car, 450hp charged car, and a 450 hp turbo car, which engine experiences more stress cruzing at 2000 rpm? all be about the same right? would wear out about the same pace? that is why i didn't think cruzing should have been brought up. just what i think, i could be wrong. i do not know alot about this, but am trying to learn.

to me the differences in stress would occur at WOT, or peak power. i would think a 450hp n/a or turbo motor's internal components (pistons, rods, crank, bearing, ect.) would experience 450hp load on them. as opposed to a 450hp charged motors internals would experience (just a guess) 500hp to 550hp load.

the op posted about the stock mach motors capabilities. N/A vs. FI. kinda of a bad comparison because the stock motor N/A will never make BIG power because of the compression. but lets say, hypothetically you built a 1000hp N/A capable 32v 4.6 and a 1000hp FI capable 32v 4.6, but put the stock mach rods back in them (making them the weak link). start upping the boost on the charged motor, and start spinning the N/A motor higher and higher. which would make more power before one through a rod?? i would say the N/A one, but i have a feeling i'm about to learn something. lol

The problem with this theoretical stuff is you have to base it on assumptions. If this were even possible, you would have to assume the N/A car had an extreme cam profile that revved upwards of 10K RPM's whilst the boosted car was running a lot of boost and making the power anywhere from 6500-8000 RPM's. Too many variables really, but given the RPM's, I'd say the boosted car would make the power at a lower RPM and survive to make more power. The N/A car would blow up before it go to the higher RPM. This is a silly hypothetical though.

[Stopsign32v]

Oh good God guys, let it go. Both are harder on the motor than stock, leave it at that.

[st0ck Mach 1]

Originally Posted by Stopsign32v

Oh good God guys, let it go. Both are harder on the motor than stock, leave it at that.

Amen Brother! High horsepower does not equal longevity any way you build it.

[ModularMach1]

What about the longevity of new high hp cars? zo6 505hp N/A, shelby 550 F/I, with the up and coming ones having over 600 hp, Caddy and z28 have 550+ , zr1 640.

[littlemags]

Originally Posted by ModularMach1

What about the longevity of new high hp cars? zo6 505hp N/A, shelby 550 F/I, with the up and coming ones having over 600 hp, Caddy and z28 have 550+ , zr1 640.

big motors first off...displacement almost twice ours with some of the motors (6.2l in the vette)...that is comparing apples to oranges.