SSR Engineering

It seems a fair amount of you would like the simplicity of a supercharger system, if thats so, we can build an entire supercharger system for a really nice price.

One thing I want is, if you guys reply in favor of the supercharger please specify why, and also, would you prefer stages?

Example with ESTIMATED Prices
-Stage 1 - Supercharger system $3000-3500
-Stage 2 - Intercooler and Fuel $+1500
-Stage 3 - High boost, internals, etc. +$2000

Whereas the Turbo Kit would be around 6000-6500
-With Fuel, Intercooler, High Boost capabilities, etc.

krmaxima

iTrader: (13)

i voted turbo but its all depends on price and which one is more safe on the car. but it there are no problems then i would go with the turbo

K Pazzo 6

iTrader: (6)

Does it matter what year max (b/c 00-01 has 3.0 engine & 02-03 has 3.5 engine) ?

SSR Engineering

Well the pricing structure on both will be completly different, along with potential. The Turbo should be good for up to 500WHP. Whereas a conservative low-boost supercharger system will make in the 300s.

SSR Engineering

Nope, not at all. We have plans to release a Turbo Kit for both the 3.0 and 3.5 I've said too much..

TitaniuMax03

iTrader: (1)

Turbocharger it is than , but on the other hand Supercharger would be more beneficial to us "daily drivers", am I right??

SSR Engineering

Well, not necessairly, it's about the same. It's all depending on the driving style. If some of you are familiar with the Automotive Forums, they have some really good write-ups on the pros and cons of Superchargers, turbochargers etc. It's just the time it takes to read them... Here's one...

CENTRIFUGAL COMPRESSORS (The one we will use in our kit)
These are by far the most common compressor design in use today, due to it’s excellent efficiency and small size. Turbochargers are where you nomally see this design being used, however companies like Vortech, Paxton, Powerdyne and others have very good crank driven designs available.
These compressors work by using a vaned wheel (that looks a whole lot lke a flattened fan) which spins inside a specially designed housing. At high RPM, this wheel sends air screaming outwards from the center inlet, where it’s captured by the scroll of the compressor housing (the snail shell looking thing) and directed to the outlet on the big end of the scroll. This initial outward motion of the intake air is what makes the design work, because in essence it’s just a large air centrifuge relying on high air speed and RPM to work. Basically as the air slows down in the scroll and beyond, it gains in pressure and temperature, thus creating our compression. Here’s a picture to describe this…

http://www.vortechsuperchargers.com/...cw_str_sat.gif

One thing to note is that this isn’t a positive displacement compressor design. It doesn’t have a realiable airflow amount based on any RPM, because it’s very design only flows air efficiently at high RPM. Crank driven centrifugal compressors generally operate around 60,000 RPM maximum, while turbocharger compressors can exceed 120,000 RPM. So although these compressors are very efficient at high RPM, they are largely innefective at creating meaningful boost at lower RPM. This concept is called surge limit, and measures the airflow rate of the compressor into a pressurized path vs. its RPM. If you’ve ever seen a compressor map for a turbocharger, that upper line extending across the turbo’s efficiency area is this concept in action. It’s at that point in the airflow vs. pressure scale where the compressor can no longer flow air into the system.

The pros of using a centrifugal compressor include…
-very high adiabatic efficiency levels over large flow rates
-low levels of parasitic drag vs. boost produced
-many different sizes available to precisely match engine’s airflow needs
-light weight and small design make fitment easy
-ease of fitment makes intercooling very easy to add

The cons of using a centrifugal compressor include …
-high compressor RPM means lower long term reliability
-high compressor RPM means internal tolerances must be very exacting
-inability to be driven at high RPM during low speed engine operation make boost available only at moderate RPM (though there are ways around this)
-no simple way to control boost levels on crank driven designs, limiting compressor RPM vs. engine RPM choices (thus compromising boost response)

Ironlord

what kind fo supercharger? Would it be possible to stuff a roots type in?

Alright, I see its centrifigal, nevermind....

SSR Engineering

With our lack of time, and resources, probably not. We would literally have to cut your stock intake manifold in half, weld the existing runners to a roots type supercharger find a way to mount it etc. It would be a nightmare!

We're going to be using a Centrifugal (Like the Vortech) on our kit.

maximilion

iTrader: (1)

I'm sure you know that a stock 3.5 makes 255hp at the crank. When you say a supercharger will make in the 300s, are you talking 300 or 350 or 375? If its in the lower 300s it will yield only a 50-75hp increase, not really worth it if you ask me. But, if you can give us +100hp to yield 350hp, then that's another story.

SSR Engineering

I always speak in WHP figures. Crank figures are about as useful as colds Figure in about low 300 to the wheels thats more then 100+ "Crank" hp.

skandalouz

iTrader: (2)

about stage 2 s/c will do real nice..

MannyNJ2k2max

iTrader: (3)

i'd opt for the SC- i dont need 500 hp on those front wheels.....

VMaximus02

iTrader: (1)

I second that!

krmaxima

iTrader: (13)

couldnt u make a turbo kit for cheaper that doesnt make that much hp?????

Triple8Sol

iTrader: (29)

At those prices I wouldn't be able to afford one for a few years whereas I could get the SC sooner. That is just based on price.

In terms of preference, I'd rather have the turbo, although either one would be nice. Make it happen!

asu174

iTrader: (11)

Anything that will give a conservative amount of power (75-100hp) and not have my car in the shop once a month.

jaco

I also agree.
Plus, a supercharger could be a DYI. Throw in an ECU tuned by TS and and you're done.
Plus, I'm affraid of turboing an engine which was not designed for that amount of heat.

Stage 1 and 2 look most interesting. Can't wait.

bsetiawan

iTrader: (43)

Before we even talk about big powers, are our tranny able to hold 300+++ WHP ? Even with N/A engine, several trannies are already falling apart. We've got to really strengthen the tranny as well.

MannyNJ2k2max

iTrader: (3)

I'm assuming the majority of 3.5 Max owners that would consider boost mainly
just want to be 13 sec cars and not be shyt on by Evo's/Sti's on the reg-
"I" would be content with that- I drive my car everyday but like to drive aggressively and hit the track a few times a year-
So a SC (stage 1/2) would be my limit

MannyNJ2k2max

iTrader: (3)

i'm assuming manuals wont take as much beating w/ a SC as opposed to Turbo-
but clutch replacement isn't much of a hassle...if dumping ~$4500

gkstar

iTrader: (1)

What about a roots design similar to the one comptech makes for the 3.2CL's. Use a rod that goes across the engine bay to drive the blower. http://solar.innercite.com/comptech/sc_cls6.html With the battery relocated or the use of a smaller battery would give plenty of room for the blower to sit. Granted the price is higher then you 3000-3500 estimate, but does this possiblity exist? My main conern with the cent. blowers is that our motors are not high reving or fast reving motors so it is hard to get into the power band of the cent blowers. Also especially with the stillen kit for 00-01 cars there is close to 6ft of piping to deal with throttle response, pressure loss etc. Sorry for the length, my experience with my friends jackson racing kit has me craving a similar kit for the max since I bought it.

2k3TitaniumSe

iTrader: (3)

Supercharger....It's easier to install.....

† ErV †

close one, but price aside, i went with supercharger since a turbo FI has more potential parts to break. also of all the cars i've driven the supercharger felt more natural, ie didn't have that aftermarket feel to it.. .02c

SSR Engineering

Those kits have very poor power responses for $3500-4500, one of the reason is being, these guys are trying to get boost at near idle, causing a few problems, 1 of them being traction, the other being detonation. Having a high fuel pressure, and high injector duty cycle at near idle isn't worth the fuel consumption for an extra "60-70hp", so these guys are claiming. A centrifugal is probably the best in this case.

Lumbee1

Supercharger please. Of course it will be a few years before I can buy it.

Kids, house, job, etc......

Woo Cho

iTrader: (3)

I'm happy with SCer at normal PSI I'm afraid to upgrade my pulley. I'd rather safe than sorry......I preffer turbo but too costly for more risk of having mo problems......"Mo Money, Mo Problems"

btw can u guys make Intercooler for Stillen SCer???

Ghase

iTrader: (12)

I would have to say the SC. It's simply for 2 reasons, (1) My car is a auto, and I really don't want to change it to stick. (2) Price!!!!!!!!!!!!! Stealin is selling it for around $3800. It would be nice to have a kit for some were in the 2k-3k price range.!!!!!!!!!!

MyownNismo

iTrader: (13)

I would rather have a stage 2 SC

[maxi-overdose]

iTrader: (3)

I assume "fuel" from above as larger fuel injectors.


how much boost do you plan to run on the SC? my 2.87 gave me a 10psi peak with greddy type S. I wouldnt recommend an intercooler because it might lower the peak boost. Instead of "intercooler and fuel", I would suggest a cheaper and boost-referenced water injection system to cool the charging air along with cold air intakeand and a set of larger fuel injectors from RC engineering (if it is possible) with smaller ratio FMU and adjustable FPR. that should cost less than 1000 dollars.

if you insist to go with an intercooler, instead of FMIC, it will be less work and cheaper to relocate the battery to the trunck by using an AWIC - no need to do any body work and less addtional piping to get to the FMIC.


as for stage 3 - how high is "high boost"? the lowest you can get from vortech is 2.62. Only one person on .org was running this pulley with stock internals and a 11-second quater mile.

[maxi-overdose]

iTrader: (3)

6ft? not with an CAI conversion.

trust me, when you are supercharged, the length of the piping is not a big issue here. The SC sucks so hard and you wont have any throttle response problem, unless you have a stuck BOV or recir. valve. It keeps spinning and air is constantly supplied to the throttle even when it is closed. Plus the bosch recirculation valve from stillen will help lot on supplying more intake air.

pressure drop - the previous owner of my SC kit did see 1 psi gain on his boost gauge after switching from stillen intake to CAI. I believe it is because the Stillen SC intake is located right behind the radiator and sucking up all the hot air from there.

[maxi-overdose]

iTrader: (3)

hmmm...I wouldnt say that SC is safer....both of them are doing the same thing, packing more air into your engine and it requires more fuel to compensate that. A lot of engine failure are due to lacking of fuel and I have seen this happened to couple FI (SC and turbo) maximas.

it's about : know your limit, tune your car, monitoring your engine (EGT gauge is FI car's best friend).

96_vqmax

iTrader: (16)

I would prefer SC for it's simple installation.

nocsyn

i would rather get a turbo...bc to be honest...i want my car to be fast....not just moderately fast....but fast fast....a turbo would be the perfect thing....but the price...ill volunteer for a free one...ssr CALL ME

[maxi-overdose]

iTrader: (3)

how can you get boost near idle?
probably around 2000 rpm because that is just the characteristic of root type SC - where you get your peak boost around 2000 rpm. But it supposed to be installed onto your intake manifold...I dunno why did the CL sc kit has it in the front. It looks like Craig Mack's root SC'ed 4th gen. His car got totaled before he had a chance to tune it.

I think the reason that they need to have high injector duty cycle @ low rpm is because of they are getting full boost around there. Once the MAF reads that the SC is sucking loads of air, it will increase its return voltage and increase the injector duty cycle. To support fuel delivery to the engine, you will need to increase the fuel pressure. That's just how force induction on a fuel injection car works. If the fuel pressure is around 120psi and the injector duty cycles are near 100%....then they are running too much boost over a smaller injector....just like one tightens a rubber band tohis pennis and tries to pee thru it

he has to push harder to pee = high fuel pressure
he only sees few drops of **** coming out of his pennis = inadaquate fuel delivery

I would still go for a root SC if there's one available. The only benefit of centrifugal blower is that it generates less heat compare to a root type or screw type. That's why it does not detonates as much as a root/screw type system. The power band of the centrifugal blower is really really linear....less area under the curve. Imaging you get all the boost @ 2000rpm VS all the boost @ 6400rpm. check out my dyno:


see....it is really linear until 5200rpm (it might be more steep if that AFR is tuned to 11:1). That means when I race someone from rolling, I have to make sure that I downshift to somewhere near there. That's not too bad - 3000rpm, 3rd gear and downshift to 5000rpm. But if I am racing someone from dead stop....ah~ I'll need some time to climb to there. That's why some people that I raced from dead stop was able to pull on me for a second....once my rpm starts to climb, they usually ended up showing on my rear view mirror (I got my *** kicked by some heavy modified WRX.)

SSR Engineering

Also, some other things I'd like to point out is that, the Roots type blower has a few negatives.
-thermal efficiency of this design is inherently lower than others
-large compressor design makes placement and/or drive assembly hard to fit in cramped engine bays
-heavy internal parts mean high parasitic losses when boosting
-large size and difficulty of placement can make it hard to add an intercooler

[maxi-overdose]

iTrader: (3)

like I said, intercooler may not be necessary for an SC application. most of the SC peeps on .org dont have intercooler. Since the SC is belt driven, it doesnt generate much heat as a exhaust gas driven turbo charger, an intercooler is not required. Jay25 even mentioned that he experienced major torque loss on an intercooled SC maxima with 2.87 pulley.

you can still cool charging air on a root/screw type SC with water injection. I dunno why everybody leans toward intercooler and willing to go thru all the hassle on the piping and body work to lower their peak boost. Even the fastest maxima on maxima.org is not intercooled.

if you really want to go this route, go for the air/water aftercooler - but it is expensive.

to save big bucks, use a water injection system. only donwside is that you will have to fill it up quite often if you boost a lot. But it only takes 300 dollars to build one and tap a nozzle into the charger pipe.

IceY2K1

iTrader: (3)

Turbo handsdown. Build a "Stage II" for the 2K-2K1 VQ30 and I'll buy it TODAY.

Stage I:
T3/T4
FMIC
manifolds/piping
hose/clamps
Vortech FMU
cheap BOV(have delete option)
cheap WG(have delete option)

Stage II:
GT30R
Apexi S-AFC
HKS BOV
TIAL WG
Blitz TT
Hallman MBC

Stage III:
GT35R
DSBC
Aquamist WI
Greddy Emanage
RC 440cc injectors
3" MB exhaust

IceY2K1

iTrader: (3)

BTW, any chance we can meet, since I'm in Tucson?

I know your shop isn't, but I'd still like to talk.

SSR Engineering

Stage I:
T3/T4
FMIC
manifolds/piping
hose/clamps
Vortech FMU
cheap BOV(have delete option)
cheap WG(have delete option)

Stage II:
GT30R (Ball-Bearing?)
Apexi S-AFC
HKS BOV
TIAL WG
Blitz TT
Hallman MBC

Stage III:
GT35R (ball-bearing?)
DSBC (DSBC?)
Aquamist WI
Greddy Emanage
RC 440cc injectors <--eww
3" MB exhaust

This is a good idea, we can do it, if you want we could build one for your car. But more then likely a GT30R Would require aftermarket fuel injectors as well.

As far as meeting, I can see what my brothers up to, I'm in phoenix for a while. I'm sure he wouldn't mind meeting with you