Ford Focus Forum banner
Cancel
Create thread New Garage Forums

Which Dyno would you rather have?

Jump to Latest
21 - 40 of 54 Posts
Discussion starter · #21 ·
It's just odd, that the tires spin, I mean the power does climb pretty aggressively, BUT it's not like it kicks hard at ONE point to cause a loss of traction. Or does it kick hard like that?

Either way, from the sound of it, since I'm not into the 1320, then the Vortech is better, but if I wanted to drag, it would probably be better with the Jackson. I just want Auto-X, and road racing, in which you can usually do a pretty good job keeping your car in the higher RPM's if you know how to drive. Which I don't...
Image
 
Save
Reply Quote Like Like
#22 ·
Belacyrf that is were you think that on paper but at least with the Mustangs that both have 10psi blower one being the Screw type Kenny Bell and the other the Vortech the Vortech wins everytime because once you get into the power band in 1st gear u r never out of it again until the finish. Ive have seen this time and time again. Heck call Kenny Bell and he will even admit that at the track the Vortech will win. I compare the Vortech to the Kenny Bell because hands down the srew type is the most efficiant roots type charger also the coolest running.Its not true at all that the JRSC will win at the track over the Vortech just for FYI Bro.
 
#23 ·
Were the JRSC will win is a quik stop light to stop light or o to 60. Thats why roots type are good for the street and the track they just wont run down a centrifical type charger. The centrifical wont beet a roots 0 to 60 but once past that he will go around u in a big way. With the turbo tech becoming so much better the turbo acts like a roots but also has a top end that keeps climbing but the mid range on a turbo can also be to much causing tire spin. Just repeating what I know have been discussed already im just find the 3 diff types of chargers very interesting to talk about.
 
#24 ·
I'd take the power every time. If the power causes traction issues, add traction, not use less power because your traction is poor.

Yes it will be interesting to see the numbers on a focus.

BTW, while those graphs show poor low end power and lots on top, I would not consider that output "peaky" what-so-ever.
 
#25 ·
Welding Rod I agree but that is the problem that ive been trying to point out to the focusters. On the front wheel driver You cant put upper and lower control arms or 4 link like the Mustangs or ladder bars like the chevys can. We are at a big I repeat big disadvantage compared to rear wheel drive. The rear whl drv guys can put these traction systems on with a 10 dot mickey thomp slick and drive it anywere,but try driving around with a front wheel drive with a 10 inch slick. The cops would probalbly pull u over for just looking wierd. (sorry cant spell)I think thats why these cars are interseting me more now then the Mustangs are because I take it as a challenge. I had one of the very first at least in Chi town true 10 inch slick 9 sec qrtr Mustang around. I did it because so many said it couldnt be done would never hook. Now there running in the 8sec zone. (sorry I know im bragging know)take care RUBBER DOWN Wedge.
 
#26 ·
Vortech HP = 272@7900
Vortech Torque = 181@7900
Jackson HP = 188@7700
Jackson Torque = 138@5600
Click to expand...
<font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">Sorry, I'm skipping over a bit here... but why isn't everyone running 600whp at 10,000rpm? Is it because there aren't big enough centrifugal superchargers to deliver 30PSI of boost? Or is it because the ENGINE is a limiting factor and build-ups are expensive.

Your engine is going to be weakest at high rpm (greatest stress on the engine). If this is where you are making your peak boost and peak power, then you have to find the limit that is safe here. As rpms go up the maximum torque the engine can safely handle is going to be lower and lower. So at 2K rpm it might be able to handle 400ftlbs w/o breaking, at 4K rpm 300ftlbs w/o breaking, at 7K rpm 200ftlbs w/o breaking, and at 9K rpm 150ftlbs w/o breaking.

If your engine is bullet-proof, then that Vortech is nice. But otherwise you are making more and more power as your engine is more and more stressed by the rpms. So if your safe boost at redline is 14PSI, it might be able to handle 18PSI at 3K rpm... but the centrifugal supercharger can't be geared to even deliver the 14PSI it makes at redline. In fact, its making very very little power at the rpms the engine is strongest compared to the roots (where you can just use a bigger roots with more boost to make the same topend).

In other words, I'd rather have a 250ftlbs and 200whp dyno than a 150ftlbs and 200whp dyno... which is a valid argument considering both are likely equally safe as far as engine internals. And if the engine can handle 300whp, then I'd rather have a 400wftlbs and 300whp dyno than a 200ftlbs and 300whp dyno.
Image


[ 11-02-2002, 07:29 PM: Message edited by: Ducman69 ]
 
Discussion starter · #27 ·
I understand that, but since neither is topping out with to much torque, I mean the Vortech is only giving you 180ft/lbs at redline. But still I understand that as far as stress on the engine, the centrifugal would put the most.

Ok... now I have a thought, and I don't even know if it's possible. But is there such a thing that can be mounted somewhere in the intake path, similar to a BOV or bypass valve, that is pressure sensative? I mean basically the BOV allows a mass of backpressure to escape before the compressor, but would it be possible to put something like a bypass that could be set to say ohhh.. 14 PSI, and anything over 15PSI escapes through the bov rather than continually building boost, you keep it at 14 PSI allowing the excess air to escape. It would probably have to be a blow through setup, and the BOV would have to be before the MAF.. but is there something like that? Because that would enable you to use a bigger pulley, and maintain solid PSI for a while. I dunno.. just guessing here
 
Save
Reply Quote Like Like
#28 ·
Wedge - I agree about the FWD/drag thing. Why anyone who is into drag racing would choose a Focus for their platform escapes me.

Personally I see drag kind of as a novelty - nothing to be taken too seriously as it does not accurately represent a vehicle's worth on the road, when viewed alone. Kind of like trying to argue who the best basketball player is using only the height of his vertical jump as the criteria.

I feel its popularity is probably due to its convience factor, and because the basics of the contest are standardized, more than anything else. But obviously some are into it, and that is cool. Personally I would have choosen a different vehicle for that sport.

BTW, I am not trying to shoot down those who participate in this, so please lets not get all defensive and take the thread off track.

[ 11-02-2002, 10:39 PM: Message edited by: Welding Rod ]
 
#29 ·
Ducman69 I agree with your statement but the only problem with your set up is that u will never have a car that is very quik because of tire spin. If u r into a tire smoker then yes I would like this set up but if u want to win races of any kind drag,road course,slalom then u better find traction.Look at Nascar how much the cars slow when the tires go away or NHRA Drag racing when u smoke em u lose.As far as the engine holding together I agree rpm will take it out sooner but the inline 4 cyl will take a ton more rpm then a V-8 will and will last alot longer. Look at crotchrocket Motorcycles no torque,Hi Horsepower,Hi RPM allways and they last but they also cant be beat by any cruiser,v-max,107 ci Big Dog Harley,1800 cc Valkyrie. Ive had a few of these bikes and 12.00 seconds was the fastest now I have a 929 cc Honda and ive gone 10.80 at 131.So for the focus make alot of Horsepower,rpm the motor and make the car light and U will have a winner,Wont need alot of torque in a lite car.Wont make a ton of torque even if u needed it. Im coming back to my points in an old post build the car for what it was designed for and that was Hi RPM,Hi Horsepower in a light package. Sure a v-8 is a better set up but are cars arent ment to act like or run like v-8. Take Care RUBBER DOWN Wedge.
 
#30 ·
You still have a throttle body to control engine power (1/3 open, 1/2 open, 2/3 open... you know).

Motorcycle engines are trying to maximize power from as small and light an engine as possible, and doing so naturally aspirated. They aren't torqueless on purpose, but you try making a naturally aspirated engine thats efficient at 3K rpm -AND- 14K rpm (the VFR even has VTEC but that helps only a little). And making power at high rpm at the sacrifice of low rpm is better than visaversa due to gearing (can stay in a lower gear longer). The more power you have available at high rpm the better! No such thing as too much.

But thats not my point. My point is that you are choosing a power adder to an existing engine (that you don't want to blow up). That engine is going to be limited in the boost it can handle at high rpm and still stay in one piece. If that is 15PSI at 7K rpm before it gets really dangerous, the centrifugal isn't likely to provide even half that boost at 3.5K rpm (and consequently low torque). If you have a turbo (or whipple, whatever) that can deliver the same 15PSI at 7K rpm, but spool up to 15PSI and hold it by 4K rpm... you simply have more available power with the same safe peak output at high rpm. 300ftlbs,200hp vs 200ftlbs,200hp... not 300ftlbs,200hp vs 200ftlbs,300hp (which is likely quicker).

If you have traction problems in 1st and 2nd gear, well durrr... don't go WOT yet and roll it on smooth. =B But when you are in higher gears or approaching a straight on the track, why would you ever want to be FORCED to have less available power even if you mash the pedal all the way to the floor??? It makes no sense. As long as the torque curve is smooth (no spikes you have to try and anticipate), less power just means less throttle when you don't need/want it.

[ 11-03-2002, 12:10 AM: Message edited by: Ducman69 ]
 
#31 ·
Also one thing i use is the wireless remote switch mounted on my stearing wheel this allows me to change from 8 to 18 or what ever i set the two settings at

This would work on a road ,drag,street what ever you were doing

tom
 
Discussion starter · #32 ·
Tom, does that control the wastegate? Because my questions would be something that acts similar to to wastegate, but is more for the intake path. Allowing anything more than a preset PSI escape via the BOV or bypass.

Because if you could set the centrifugal pulley large enough to deliver say 5-7 PSI by 3500 (which is like 25-30 PSI at redline), but then just have a BOV that allows anything over say 12 PSI to escape via a BOV, that would keep your engine a little safer, of course I'm not sure what it would do to intake temps.

But is there such a thing?
 
Save
Reply Quote Like Like
#33 ·
belacryf, by controling the boost on the pressure side it will allways be chasing its boost target

even on the AC3 if you were to install the waste gate before the turbo you would have much better controle over the boost

A waste gate to me is the only way to controle boost,with a waste gate you are dumping the exhaust before it can spool the turbo and controles boost it very nicely

tom
 
#34 ·
even on the AC3 if you were to install the waste gate before the turbo you would have much better controle over the boost
Click to expand...
<font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">Care to elaborate on that so I can tell you *how* you're wrong?
Image


[ 11-03-2002, 01:46 PM: Message edited by: P-51 ]
 
#35 ·
Having HP at very high RPM is fine (assuming engine is designed for operation at high RPM) and does not hurt drivability. What hurts drivabilty is a narrow RPM range where the meat of the power is produced. My last bike was a Yamaha R6. Redlined at 14,500 (it was a California model, others states' redlined at 15,500). It was not peaky at all. So maybe you turn 6 or 7 K on a relaxed hiway cruise. It would still deliver good progressive power from that point up to redline - approximately a 8,000 RPM span. That was a SWEET engine and power delivery. No light switch type power output, and not the least bit dificult to control. Just very good power over a large RPM range, that just so happened to be at pretty high RPM.

I know this doesn't really relate too closely to the Zetec, but this conversation started with graphs from a Honda.
 
Discussion starter · #36 ·
Originally posted by P-51:
</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial"> even on the AC3 if you were to install the waste gate before the turbo you would have much better controle over the boost
Click to expand...
<font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">Care to elaborate on that so I can tell you *how* you're wrong?
Image
</font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">P can you tell me how it's wrong? I there a way to control boost on the intake path rather than the exhuast side?
 
Save
Reply Quote Like Like
#37 ·
Huh??? Before the turbo the air is not even pressurized. How you gonna vent it?

Edit: Disregard above, I misunderstood question.

If air were to be vented from the intake tract a problem would be that the air has already been metered by the MAF and fuel is going to be sent based on this reading. So at the very least, that issue would have to be resolved.

[ 11-03-2002, 06:28 PM: Message edited by: Welding Rod ]
 
Discussion starter · #38 ·
Right.. I understand that, it would have to be a blow through setup, and the BOV or whatever would have to be before the maf. I just don't know if there is such a thing to be able to do that.
 
Save
Reply Quote Like Like
#39 ·
Like i said with the waste gate in the exhaust side the boost is controled by controling the exh. pressure to the turbo ,there would NEVER be another boost spike

If you set the boost controler at 9psi you would never see anything above 9psi no matter what as long as the controler is set correctly

tom
 
#40 ·
Bel - I can't think of a reason why a setup like that would not work. It should be easy to install a pressure valve set for any PSI desired in the intake tract. However I think it makes more sense to limit the boost generated by the turbo in the first place instead.

If you where to rely on venting of unneccessarily over pressurized intake air you may get the desired pressure level, but with the side effect (edit: as you mentioned above and I missed) of unneccessary heating of the intake charge. As well as continually requiring the turbo to spin faster and do more work than is needed.

[ 11-03-2002, 08:53 PM: Message edited by: Welding Rod ]
 
21 - 40 of 54 Posts
About this Discussion
53 Replies
14 Participants
Last post:
belacyrf
Ford Focus Forum
posts
3.6M
members
67K
Since
1989
Forum community dedicated to Ford Focus owners and enthusiasts. Come join the discussion about RS/ST performance, modifications, troubleshooting, maintenance, and more!
Full Forum Listing
Explore Our Forums
TEAM Pit Stop Ford SVT Focus Headquarters Forced Induction & Nitrous MK I Tech New Member Introductions