Another Edelbrock E-Force Supercharger Thread

evo8904 · Apr 28, 2016

ShelbyGT350 said:
Hmm that's interesting - I'm looking at American Muscle for the Stage1 Whipple Supercharger for 2015-2016 Mustangs and it's $7,395 but on CJ Pony Parts for the Edelbrock Stage 1 Supercharger of 2015-2016 Mustangs it's $7,298, about $100 cheaper. Granted, Whipple is 2900cfm and Edelbrock is 2,300cfm. the Whipple uses larger injectors (meaning poorer gas mileage) and uses a jackshaft (which, under hard acceleration, can break or get jammed), and if you're drag racing all the time, it's probably OK.

I'd rather get an Edelbrock, which looks stock from the factory, puts out close to 700HP, and for normal street driving, it's fine. No cutting or removal of the K-brace either. Very minimal modifications (plug and play) compared to Roush.

Different strokes for different folks.

Hmm, where did I state whipple in my reply??? Yeah, I didn't....

I actually got my whipple for a lot less. Probably, won't get the price that I paid but I was referring to other SC. I would go with a Roush over this edelbrock all day long. Reusing the stock TB is a joke on a PD SC. I wouldn't even waste my time with the stock TB on a PD SC. I actually tried the stock TB on my Whipple. It honestly ran pretty bad, tons of hesitation. Put the whipple 132mm TB on and my car now drives better than stock. But hey, you sound like an expert, enjoy that edelbrock....

Superman15 · Apr 28, 2016

Once your dam near doubling HP, gas mileage is going to take a major hit. It is what it is. I doubt there will be a big difference between the Edelbrock and other SC's in MPG. I do like the look of the Edelbrock, and I like their products overall. Always have. But the ceiling is much lower on the Edelbrock. I don't see it having a whole ton of room for growth down the line.

samcrac · Apr 28, 2016

ShelbyGT350 said:
Here's a link to this Edelbrock 1586 Supercharger w/Tuner setup at CJ Pony Parts:

http://www.cjponyparts.com/edelbroc...r-manual-transmission-gt-2015-2016/p/EDL1586/

One downside - the installation instruction manual says that the existing strut tower brace will have to be removed and discarded - the supercharger will NOT fit underneath the factory brace (so let's hope Edelbrock or someone else makes one that does fit)!

Can you please show me where you got the installation manual I would like to take a look?

Superman15 · Apr 28, 2016

samcrac said:
Can you please show me where you got the installation manual I would like to take a look?

Follow the link, then scroll to the very bottom.

MichaelTaylor195 · Apr 30, 2016

I know this was just released but has anyone placed an order for one? Is this system drawing any interest from those looking to go FI?

ShelbyGT350 · May 1, 2016

samcrac said:
Can you please show me where you got the installation manual I would like to take a look?

If you click on the link above and scroll down the page, you will find the installation instructions.

Whipple SC · May 1, 2016

ShelbyGT350 said:
Hmm that's interesting - I'm looking at American Muscle for the Stage1 Whipple Supercharger for 2015-2016 Mustangs and it's $7,395 but on CJ Pony Parts for the Edelbrock Stage 1 Supercharger of 2015-2016 Mustangs it's $7,298, about $100 cheaper. Granted, Whipple is 2900cfm and Edelbrock is 2,300cfm. the Whipple uses larger injectors (meaning poorer gas mileage) and uses a jackshaft (which, under hard acceleration, can break or get jammed), and if you're drag racing all the time, it's probably OK.

I'd rather get an Edelbrock, which looks stock from the factory, puts out close to 700HP, and for normal street driving, it's fine. No cutting or removal of the K-brace either. Very minimal modifications (plug and play) compared to Roush.

Different strokes for different folks.

C'mon brotha??? Let's get the info accurate.

SC ratings is Liters per rev, not CFM.

Our stage 1 has 58lb/hr stock Bosch GT 500 injectors vs 47lb/hr. No difference in fuel economy, just more of a limit on power level and chance of running deathly lean in cool climates. Roush uses torque control to clip power when inj maxes, I currently don't know of an aftermarket based tune that does that accurately.

Jackshaft will fail? You understand that the Ford Cobra Jet uses the same sc right? How does the tapered stainless steel shaft, driven by 2 precision helical gears with double angular bearings on both ends get jammed? The tapered shaft allows for significant torsional twist, actually quite a unique and beneficial design.

The Edelbrock system is very nice but if your going to compare it's best to have more accurate info.

Compare cals, system upgrades (injectors, fans, throttle body, colors, belt systems, Flight Control...)

Jmeo · May 1, 2016

Admittedly I haven't researched this setup but from what I have seen and read I imagine heat soak is going to be the death of this setup??? $100 says their hp ratings were first pull first time and subsequent pulls dropped quickly.

Dollars to dollars this is the weakest option out there but I'm sure there will be people who will give it a try and we shall all see what happens.

ShelbyGT350 · May 2, 2016

Whipple SC said:
C'mon brotha??? Let's get the info accurate.

SC ratings is Liters per rev, not CFM.

Our stage 1 has 58lb/hr stock Bosch GT 500 injectors vs 47lb/hr. No difference in fuel economy, just more of a limit on power level and chance of running deathly lean in cool climates. Roush uses torque control to clip power when inj maxes, I currently don't know of an aftermarket based tune that does that accurately.

Jackshaft will fail? You understand that the Ford Cobra Jet uses the same sc right? How does the tapered stainless steel shaft, driven by 2 precision helical gears with double angular bearings on both ends get jammed? The tapered shaft allows for significant torsional twist, actually quite a unique and beneficial design.

The Edelbrock system is very nice but if your going to compare it's best to have more accurate info.

Compare cals, system upgrades (injectors, fans, throttle body, colors, belt systems, Flight Control...)

Thank you for correcting me - my bad. I'm not looking to drag race. Just spirited driving in SoCal. Also do not want to blow up my engine. Jackshafts are just one more thing to go wrong - Murphy's Law. As to heat soak, why do you think they sized the heat exchanger so large? As far as HP/TQ ratings, assuming they are members of SAE, I would have to believe there is a set of objective standards upon which HP/TQ determinations are made.

Whipple SC · May 2, 2016

ShelbyGT350 said:
Thank you for correcting me - my bad. I'm not looking to drag race. Just spirited driving in SoCal. Also do not want to blow up my engine. Jackshafts are just one more thing to go wrong - Murphy's Law. As to heat soak, why do you think they sized the heat exchanger so large? As far as HP/TQ ratings, assuming they are members of SAE, I would have to believe there is a set of objective standards upon which HP/TQ determinations are made.

Identical size to our LTR but less heat soak, if you know what your doing when you build a system you don't sacrifice in this area which some do or have, us, Edelbrock and VMP sized correctly in this app. An upside down SC is our least favorite because they typically deal with heat soak the worse of all the designs available. Also long runners typically help low end torque but really hurt HP as you slow air speed down, increase pressure drop and increase IAT2's, with the Coyote being a high RPM engine, in some cases this could be a problem. But, some designs only lend them self one direction of fitment and I think this is a nice system that will work for some, certainly a very clever system and I like how they are being different then Roush and VMP.

Those numbers are engine rated. RW will be around 580-600 on manuals which is good for a stage 1 system. Engine ratings vs RW are not always a direct relationship unless you follow full SAE standards which almost no aftermarket company does. Example, intercooler water has to be in a closed system so temp rises like it does in the real world. Heat around the engine does not increaes on a engine dyno like it does under the hood, etc.

As for jackshafts being extra parts. You realize all SC's that are not direct drive style couplings need a drive extension or an extra long shaft, with extra bearings and coupling to operate, including upside down designs. Therefore, in this app, the shafts and bearing qty are equal. Instead of a plastic coupler or love joy, we have 2 precision cut helical gears. So there are no "extra" parts to fail. Again, Ford Racing, GM Racing and Mopar have all chosen the same design for there race cars and have had incredible success.

Edelbrock did great on the design, no question, but let's try and keep comparison's accurate so people don't get the wrong idea on improper information. If you have any questions, don't hesitate to ask.

TheDivaDanielle · May 2, 2016

that thing looks so good, I'd consider it just for looking for good.. lol

ShelbyGT350 · May 2, 2016

Whipple SC said:
Identical size to our LTR but less heat soak, if you know what your doing when you build a system you don't sacrifice in this area which some do or have, us, Edelbrock and VMP sized correctly in this app. An upside down SC is our least favorite because they typically deal with heat soak the worse of all the designs available. Also long runners typically help low end torque but really hurt HP as you slow air speed down, increase pressure drop and increase IAT2's, with the Coyote being a high RPM engine, in some cases this could be a problem. But, some designs only lend them self one direction of fitment and I think this is a nice system that will work for some, certainly a very clever system and I like how they are being different then Roush and VMP.

Those numbers are engine rated. RW will be around 580-600 on manuals which is good for a stage 1 system. Engine ratings vs RW are not always a direct relationship unless you follow full SAE standards which almost no aftermarket company does. Example, intercooler water has to be in a closed system so temp rises like it does in the real world. Heat around the engine does not increaes on a engine dyno like it does under the hood, etc.

As for jackshafts being extra parts. You realize all SC's that are not direct drive style couplings need a drive extension or an extra long shaft, with extra bearings and coupling to operate, including upside down designs. Therefore, in this app, the shafts and bearing qty are equal. Instead of a plastic coupler or love joy, we have 2 precision cut helical gears. So there are no "extra" parts to fail. Again, Ford Racing, GM Racing and Mopar have all chosen the same design for there race cars and have had incredible success.

Edelbrock did great on the design, no question, but let's try and keep comparison's accurate so people don't get the wrong idea on improper information. If you have any questions, don't hesitate to ask.

Fair enough. Different strokes for different strokes. I'm not building a race car. If I were, then I might consider Whipple, Ford Racing/Roush, etc. As far as heat soak is concerned, I'm not an engineer, but more of a "gear head." I would think that having the heat exchanger in an upside-down configuration would have LESS heat soak than traditional configurations because the heat exchanger is farther away from the engine block. But on the other hand, with the laws of thermodynamics, heat goes to cold and heat rises.

Evolvd · May 2, 2016

Being upside down doesn't lend itself to heat soak due to the fact that most of the heat that is soaking it comes from the compressed air being forced into head.

Whipple SC · May 2, 2016

ShelbyGT350 said:
Fair enough. Different strokes for different strokes. I'm not building a race car. If I were, then I might consider Whipple, Ford Racing/Roush, etc. As far as heat soak is concerned, I'm not an engineer, but more of a "gear head." I would think that having the heat exchanger in an upside-down configuration would have LESS heat soak than traditional configurations because the heat exchanger is farther away from the engine block. But on the other hand, with the laws of thermodynamics, heat goes to cold and heat rises.

Yes, heat rises, the top of the system is the hottest part. Also keep in mind, during heat soak (engine off), there is no water flowing so everything rises to the top. Idle your car for 5 minutes, what's hotter, below the motor or above it? Again, it's a nice system, but it shouldn't be touted as less heat soak.

As for a race car, we have plenty of race cars out there but 95% goes on daily driven street cars, that is our primary market and why we make the most power of any emissions legal system available. With Flight Control, customers can actually lower there power if ever needed.

ShelbyGT350 · May 3, 2016

Whipple SC said:
Yes, heat rises, the top of the system is the hottest part. Also keep in mind, during heat soak (engine off), there is no water flowing so everything rises to the top. Idle your car for 5 minutes, what's hotter, below the motor or above it? Again, it's a nice system, but it shouldn't be touted as less heat soak.

As for a race car, we have plenty of race cars out there but 95% goes on daily driven street cars, that is our primary market and why we make the most power of any emissions legal system available. With Flight Control, customers can actually lower there power if ever needed.

What kind of SAE power do you get out of your 2300 Stage 1 systems?

It's hotter at the bottom of the valley of the motor next to the block rather than 8 inches north of it, don't you think?

Another Edelbrock E-Force Supercharger Thread

evo8904

I'm a member???

Superman15

Shake n Bake

samcrac

Well-Known Member

Superman15

Shake n Bake

MichaelTaylor195

Well-Known Member

ShelbyGT350

Shelby GT350

Whipple SC

Well-Known Member

Jmeo

You said member ;)

ShelbyGT350

Shelby GT350

Whipple SC

Well-Known Member

TheDivaDanielle

Living the Dream

ShelbyGT350

Shelby GT350

Evolvd

Instigator

Whipple SC

Well-Known Member

ShelbyGT350

Shelby GT350