i have a supercharger on my 2004 mustang which is street/strip and its pretty fast i guess. im mostly going to just drive the 12' on the street and maybe go to the track with it occasionally. I want the car to handle good as well, but i probably won't autocross it. i already have 2 supercharged cars, roots on the lightning and centri on the 04. The roots blower runs out of steam up high in the rpm range and the centri is just a pain in the a$$ to get the belt on it and doesnt have the torque i want..
No offence dude, but you’re casting all Positive Displacement systems in the same light as an OEM Eaton, on a near 4,700lb pick-up truck, powered by a long stroke, torque oriented engine that was saddled with the same heads that were found on the 2V 4.6L Mustangs. No wonder it runs out of steam up top…it was never intended to spend a lot of time up there in the first place.
Modern performance oriented Eaton’s like the standard 5th Gen or Twin Vortices Series like the ones Roush used …or Twin Screw’s huffers like Kenne Bell/
Whipple/Lysholm use are built with far more performance oriented goals in mind, in comparison to an Eaton MP112 that was designed to run 100,000-miles between oil changes.
That 5.0L TiVCT in the ’12 Mustang was built to breath. A hard spinning PD blower atop that engine will pull and pull and pull till the cows come home. No, it won’t have the upper mid and top end charge a turbo would, but neither does a turbo have the sledge hammer like grunt down low or seamless drivability that the PD blower has. Street cars thrive on low end torque..they depend on it. You’ll spend 95% of your engines run time in those regions of the power band…so why wouldn’t you want a forced induction system that capitalizes that aspect?
ithe 335i i have is twin turbo'd and once it gets into the torque range it goes, so i like the torque at like 3k rpms. No need for it at 1k rpms like a twin screw blower.
Again, apples and oranges. You've got a stroker engine to accomidate your power adder. That 335 makes up for some of the lost torque in the lower regions that would wouldn't otherwise have with the smaller displacement engine.
And saying there's no need for torque in the sub 3,000RPM area's of the power band sounds like just the type of excuse you might expect someone who's vehicle won't make them in those area's in the first place. It's hard to miss it, if you've never had it.
Can you imagine how much of a dog your lightning would be if it didn't start pouring on the steam until 3,000RPM+. It would be a driving nightmare on the street.
The next you're lugging up a hill in low gear with your Lightning, briskly pulling away from a stop with little effort, or pulling out to pass a vehicle without having to shift into passing gear, remember how handy that low end torque is....and then wonder what it would be like to drive a vehicle without it!
It’s your prerogative to dislike Positive Displacement chargers if you wish (though you'd be doing yourself the disservice of basing it on the past experience of an OEM system) and it’s fine that you want to try something different by going the turbo route but don’t be surprised if different doesn’t necessarily translate into better.
I like the idea of tubo's for light weight weekend toys, or drag strip terrors, but I personally think they're an awful choise as a daily drivers....and would get tired of that non-resposive, peaky powerband in a hurry. My .02 of course.