Upgrading P1X to…

[KKell83]

I think the whole bottom end thing is myth. Under my previous tune, the car made 650 rwtq by 2850 rpm and nearly 900 rwtq at peak. Not sure how much harder anyone would need it to hit. IN fact, without my MOTEC to tone it down, it hits TOO HARD. And that's not even on an overdrive balancer. That's just small pulley and 10 rib.

A 3.0 liter twin screw whipple is superior to a 2.65 liter roots blower in EVERY WAY. Full stop. No asterisks or gotchas.

Much of how hard it hits has to do with how much timing the tuner does or doesn't shove in early in the rpm range. So whether the myth that the TVS has better low rpm sauce comes from tune or just self serving stuff from TVS owners, who knows, but rest assured, WHATEVER a 2.65TVS blower can do the 3.0 twin screw will do BETTER in EVERY CONDITION (on the same motor setup).

As far as if or when Whipple will ever retrograde the Gen5 to update to the new Gen6, who knows. They probably have a mountain of rotors and parts in the system to satisfy the 2011-2023 cars and who knows if they plan on expending those and updating to the new gen6 or just continuing the old gen5 with the S550/S197. To say that the new Gen6 improvements are incremental would be fair (i.e. it's not really going to move the needle all that much for most folks anyway).

As a PD (Twin Screw Whipple Guy) and being honest, if you're going for BIG power, I don't recommend the PD route unless you have SERIOUS strip only suspension and tubs or you're willing to find someone who is capable and willing to use the OE PCM to do some sorta torque by gear control (which is getting better with options like PCMtech).

Big power on twins or a big single turbo is a better route because it can be mechanically moderated with a wastegate.

So in THAT sense, for what/how most people will use the setup, the differences between the TS and the TVS aren't really all that drastic on their face. The cooling advantages however do come into play in a further dimension with street driving or back to back pulls, etc. To say that the TVS guys have bigger challenges keeping their IAT2's in check (than the whipple guys) is not controversial or unfair.

Well said. And as you know I’m not here trying to make monster power. My buddy has a Gen5 on his 2016 and even though it’s nice I wasn’t blown out of the water by it. Again, we had the full day of swapping drivers and cars and even though we did a lot of “I like this better” I just wasn’t 100% set on it. Although, as you mentioned, it could be tuning or the fact it was just on pump. I’m sure if I felt his e85 tune to compare my Procharger (and my older 2011 TVS) my opinion would have been different.

Regardless, when I bought my setup the Whipple was like 4+ months out and I was impatient.

Sponsored

 

[80FoxCoupe]

Whipple 3.0 may be superior to a 2650 is power production, but 2650 has the 3.0 coverd in the reliability department. Ask anyone with a fast whipple car.

 

[Angrey]

Whipple 3.0 may be superior to a 2650 is power production, but 2650 has the 3.0 coverd in the reliability department. Ask anyone with a fast whipple car.

The reliability issue is one of the selling points of the roots system and seals rather than nat's ass mating tolerances. It's why most OEM's go with roots over twin screw and how Eaton has made a good living over the years.

But I wouldn't classify the whipple as unreliable. There's a few issues here and there with the gen 5 3.0. The 3.8 liter, THAT is another matter. I see WAY WAY WAY more issues with them.

But yeah, having some sloppy rotors that beat the air to death with a replaceable seal against the casing is a whole lot more robust than machining precision screws that have to move and function like a swiss watch on crack cocaine.

 

[80FoxCoupe]

The reliability issue is one of the selling points of the roots system and seals rather than nat's ass mating tolerances. It's why most OEM's go with roots over twin screw and how Eaton has made a good living over the years.

But I wouldn't classify the whipple as unreliable. There's a few issues here and there with the gen 5 3.0. The 3.8 liter, THAT is another matter. I see WAY WAY WAY more issues with them.

But yeah, having some sloppy rotors that beat the air to death with a replaceable seal against the casing is a whole lot more robust than machining precision screws that have to move and function like a swiss watch on crack cocaine.

Procharger over both!

 

[KKell83]

Procharger over both!

I want to agree.

Although, earlier, I had a strange conversation with ESS where they threw out the idea of a partial sponsorship in exchange of information/data between their kit vs Procharger and asked me “what am I looking to pay.”

Here’s how the conversation went…

I suppose “proven” is the wrong word ti describe Procharger. Damn.

 

[Angrey]

Procharger over both!

Meh, pros and cons really. Centri is certainly cheaper, a little more efficient, easier to install and remove, etc. It also closer matches the power ramp in and feel of a N/A motor. It's more appropriate for a wider range of uses (compared to PD).

It also produces less specific torque. So if you want to equivocate the torque production (which ultimately translates to acceleration) of a PD, you almost have to overboost to get the lower torque you want and bleed off the top end boost (and then your efficiency argument gets tossed out the door).

It's pretty tough right now to argue with the convenience, simplicity and price of an ESS setup. For anything between 700 and 900 rwhp, it's tough to beat. Procharger is in that camp, just a little more expensive.

If I was building a car again, I'd seriously consider a centri more.

I'm hesitant to bring up the controversial crank/snout issue I guess that can be solved with a crank support.

 

[KKell83]

Meh, pros and cons really. Centri is certainly cheaper, a little more efficient, easier to install and remove, etc. It also closer matches the power ramp in and feel of a N/A motor. It's more appropriate for a wider range of uses (compared to PD).

It also produces less specific torque. So if you want to equivocate the torque production (which ultimately translates to acceleration) of a PD, you almost have to overboost to get the lower torque you want and bleed off the top end boost (and then your efficiency argument gets tossed out the door).

It's pretty tough right now to argue with the convenience, simplicity and price of an ESS setup. For anything between 700 and 900 rwhp, it's tough to beat. Procharger is in that camp, just a little more expensive.

If I was building a car again, I'd seriously consider a centri more.

I'm hesitant to bring up the controversial crank/snout issue I guess that can be solved with a crank support.

It really didn’t seem like the ESS systems are “that much cheaper” nowadays. I think they got their name out there enough that now the pricing has leveled among other supercharger (centri) manufacturers. At least when I add one of their G3-series (x or the larger R) almost bare -no fuel/bov- it’s between that of Vortech and Procharger.

 

[80FoxCoupe]

Meh, pros and cons really. Centri is certainly cheaper, a little more efficient, easier to install and remove, etc. It also closer matches the power ramp in and feel of a N/A motor. It's more appropriate for a wider range of uses (compared to PD).

It also produces less specific torque. So if you want to equivocate the torque production (which ultimately translates to acceleration) of a PD, you almost have to overboost to get the lower torque you want and bleed off the top end boost (and then your efficiency argument gets tossed out the door).

It's pretty tough right now to argue with the convenience, simplicity and price of an ESS setup. For anything between 700 and 900 rwhp, it's tough to beat. Procharger is in that camp, just a little more expensive.

If I was building a car again, I'd seriously consider a centri more.

I'm hesitant to bring up the controversial crank/snout issue I guess that can be solved with a crank support.

My car doesn't make alot of torque but is still very fast. Sometimes theory and reality are not in alignment. Either way bring your PD car out, I'll sit next to ya!

 

[KKell83]

My car doesn't make alot of torque but is still very fast. Sometimes theory and reality are not in alignment. Either way bring your PD car out, I'll sit next to ya!

I agree with the ‘theory vs reality’ statement. I wouldn’t say my car is slow either or has a lack of torque with the 3.73s but it’s all perspective I suppose.

Now let’s see some racing!

procharger vs… turbo?

 

[Angrey]

Torque produces acceleration. If you think that's some sorta voodoo sceience....I don't know what to tell you.

Torque can be overcome with multiplication (aka transmissions).

Torque is how far back in your seat the car throws you, power is how long it can keep you there.

 

[80FoxCoupe]

I agree with the ‘theory vs reality’ statement. I wouldn’t say my car is slow either or has a lack of torque with the 3.73s but it’s all perspective I suppose.

Now let’s see some racing!

procharger vs… turbo?

We got it made with the s550/coyote. Any boost and we are hauling ass. Tons of kits and brands to choose from. Can't go wrong with any of them honestly.

 

[80FoxCoupe]

Torque produces acceleration. If you think that's some sorta voodoo sceience....I don't know what to tell you.

Torque can be overcome with multiplication (aka transmissions).

Torque is how far back in your seat the car throws you, power is how long it can keep you there.

I'm with you on that. Other variables overcome the specific note of one car making more torque than another and it being quicker. Simply applying the fact that one setup makes more torque than another is ignoring all other differences. At the end of the day. We must compare one specific car and build to another versus scrutinizing which one makes more torque in a vacuum.

Last vid I saw of snout failure was Cleets whipple truck. Knocked the crank snout right off!

 

[KKell83]

I'm with you on that. Other variables overcome the specific note of one car making more torque than another and it being quicker. Simply applying the fact that one setup makes more torque than another is ignoring all other differences. At the end of the day. We must compare one specific car and build to another versus scrutinizing which one makes more torque in a vacuum.

Last vid I saw of snout failure was Cleets whipple truck. Knocked the crank snout right off!

Wow! That’s crazy with Cleets. Although I’m sure he was pushing 1000w+

 

[KKell83]

Torque produces acceleration. If you think that's some sorta voodoo sceience....I don't know what to tell you.

Torque can be overcome with multiplication (aka transmissions).

Torque is how far back in your seat the car throws you, power is how long it can keep you there.

Yep!

When I had my manual 2011 Mustang GT with a Roush and 3.73’s my buddy would comment how amazing it felt (over dramatic) in the butt dyno against his manual 2011 Mustang GT with 3.55’s and a V3 Vortech. To me his car felt weak… but both cars dynoed low to mid-600’s and when we did some friendly 40+ mph runs my car would jump forwards while his would inch by later in. Truly the ‘best’ races I have ever encountered. I love even match up’s.

 

[SolarFlare]

I want to agree.

Although, earlier, I had a strange conversation with ESS where they threw out the idea of a partial sponsorship in exchange of information/data between their kit vs Procharger and asked me “what am I looking to pay.”

Here’s how the conversation went…

I suppose “proven” is the wrong word ti describe Procharger. Damn.

Dude loses all credibility when he claims prochargers aren’t proven and inferior lol

Sponsored