Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Shocker98GT" data-source="post: 368792" data-attributes="member: 9697">Apparently you've never seen a centrifugal supercharger's boost curve. <a href="http://www.musclemustangfastfords.com/tech/mmfp_0412_ford_modular_motor_forced_induction/vortech.html" target="_blank">http://www.musclemustangfastfords.com/tech/mmfp_0412_ford_modular_motor_forced_induction/vortech.html</a>The Kenne Bell/Eaton superchargers have the same power curve a naturally aspirated car does, because you have boost across the RPM range. In other words it amplifies the torque curve that the naturally aspirated engine has. Any form of boost does this, but a centrifugal only really cranks out boost at really high RPMs. Comparing the different types of superchargers, the Vortech car has more peak power than any of the other supercharged cars, but look at the torque curve. It doesn't outpower the positive displacement supercharged engines until around 5700 rpm, and anywhere below that the positive displacement charged cars kill them in torque output. At 3000rpm it's a difference of nearly 200lb/ft of torque. The same is true of a well built N/A car, except with cams, heads, and intake, you're shifting the torque curve upward in the RPM range, but the torque curve is still much, much broader than a centrifugally supercharged car with the same power output. You can't say "a S/C car" like it's apples to apples because a positive displacement supercharged car and a centrifugally supercharged car have completely different characteristics. If one said a Kenne Bell/Eaton charged car vs a N/A car with equal power output, then sure, the KB car would likely win because of the added low RPM torque. I was arguing that a CENTRIFUGAL car won't have the torque curve that a n/a car with equal power output would, which in almost every case is true.</blockquote>