60-130mph times for boosted cars

[Exploded_Muffin]

I agree, the claims are wild aren't they? The positive take away is that boost on a coyote is fast regardless. We have a ton of options to meet everyone's needs. From Ultralight/ultra efficient/ultra affordable centri kits to inefficient/heavy PD and Uber expensive lower performing TT kits with everything in between! We have options!

I posted this in a different thread:

"As far as I know no controlled tests have been done (and probably never will be) on an ESS kit vs any of the others so can't say what kit is the best pound for pound etc.
I can only say based of my own anecdotal experience that it's a good kit and even that is very limited in scope as I have never tried any other kit myself (I believe most people getting this kit are on their first rodeo with boost. It's a novice friendly kit which is one of its main selling points)"

What is really going on is that the ESS pulleys are rated incorrectly for the Gen 3 motors (almost always produce more boost than the pulley is rated for even on a warm day).
As beefcake mentioned as well the fuel does not really matter, really all about the timing your fuel supports on your setup. 93, meth, e30, e54, e85 gives an idea but meaningless overall without taking timing into account

That said I won't change my kit out for anything as I'm fully satisfied with it, as I'm sure the majority of people are with whatever kits they have.

Sponsored

 

[80FoxCoupe]

I posted this in a different thread:

"As far as I know no controlled tests have been done (and probably never will be) on an ESS kit vs any of the others so can't say what kit is the best pound for pound etc.
I can only say based of my own anecdotal experience that it's a good kit and even that is very limited in scope as I have never tried any other kit myself (I believe most people getting this kit are on their first rodeo with boost. It's a novice friendly kit which is one of its main selling points)"

What is really going on is that the ESS pulleys are rated incorrectly for the Gen 3 motors (almost always produce more boost than the pulley is rated for even on a warm day).
As beefcake mentioned as well the fuel does not really matter, really all about the timing your fuel supports on your setup. 93, meth, e30, e54, e85 gives an idea but meaningless overall without taking timing into account

That said I won't change my kit out for anything as I'm fully satisfied with it, as I'm the majority of people are with whatever kits they have.

Boost is an arbitrary number as we have established. I don't reference it for anything personally. I track barometric pressure, water grains, DA and my time slips to track my own performance. As long as your setup meets your needs, that's the right setup for you!

 

[LSchicago]

please, stop, don’t give ESS guys any ideas. They are already more efficient than midnight and aldowelds kits.

I think I might bump my P1X boost from 5# to 6# so I can get solidly in the 9's.

 

[Angrey]

This thread definitely took a turn,

As someone who's not a centri guy, I'm convinced ESS is going to cut into Procharger's share of the centri market.

I must admit however that some of the claims being thrown around range from unfounded to outright laughable.

A quick sanity check of adiabatic efficiency will call bullshit on claims of near doubling a motor output on single digit boost values. In layman's terms, it's impossible. If we know the motor puts out around 430-450 hp without the blower, claiming it will put out 850 hp (to the wheels) on 10 lbs of boost just doesn't work, (theoretically). Even if it were 100% efficient, you're not jumping that much on 10 psi. (500 rwhp, at 10 psi above standard pressure would net 840 rwhp, assuming zero losses).

In summary, no one doubts the efficacy of the new player to the mustang bewst marketplace. But some of the wild claims about doing it at obviously low balled boost levels strain credibility. And as we've pointed out, the culprit is the boost measurements, which are highly dubious to start.

The only real way would be to see manufacturer's tested efficiency data on the blower, which can NOT be 100% (or greater).

For those of you who have the grey matter to digest it, here's a great engineering paper on the 4 major compressor types (roots, twin screw (lysholm or bicera), centrifugal and turbo).

bad3552.0001.001.pdf (umich.edu)

And despite all the homers for each type, it's exactly what you would expect:

1) Turbo chargers are the most efficient (using free exhaust momentum) anywhere outside of very low rpm (where backpressure exceeds the pressure ratio).

2) Centrifugals are next, with efficiencies that "approach" turbos but only at VERY VERY high speeds.

3) Twin screw are next.

4) Roots type are last.

The paper even discusses several of the typical pros and cons we always discuss from twin screw manufacturer costs and complexities to bulk and size of units, to centrifugal gearing and dampening requirements from engine variations to low pressure conditions and challenges with turbos and twin screws, etc, etc.

I post this as exhibit to call bullshit on centri blower claims of wild efficiencies that aren't just atypical, but in some claims, impossible or hyper-theoretical.

 

[Brad1810r80]

I haven't seen anybody claim 850rwhp on 10psi. I've never had my car dyno so I have no clue. I just know the round bout weight, and my trap speed. (119mph 1/8) and my boost gauge was hitting 11psi near shift point. I have stock fuel pump and bap so I highly doubt I'm over 800 .

This thread definitely took a turn,

As someone who's not a centri guy, I'm convinced ESS is going to cut into Procharger's share of the centri market.

I must admit however that some of the claims being thrown around range from unfounded to outright laughable.

A quick sanity check of adiabatic efficiency will call bullshit on claims of near doubling a motor output on single digit boost values. In layman's terms, it's impossible. If we know the motor puts out around 430-450 hp without the blower, claiming it will put out 850 hp (to the wheels) on 10 lbs of boost just doesn't work, (theoretically). Even if it were 100% efficient, you're not jumping that much on 10 psi. (500 rwhp, at 10 psi above standard pressure would net 840 rwhp, assuming zero losses).

In summary, no one doubts the efficacy of the new player to the mustang bewst marketplace. But some of the wild claims about doing it at obviously low balled boost levels strain credibility. And as we've pointed out, the culprit is the boost measurements, which are highly dubious to start.

The only real way would be to see manufacturer's tested efficiency data on the blower, which can NOT be 100% (or greater).

For those of you who have the grey matter to digest it, here's a great engineering paper on the 4 major compressor types (roots, twin screw (lysholm or bicera), centrifugal and turbo).

bad3552.0001.001.pdf (umich.edu)

And despite all the homers for each type, it's exactly what you would expect:

1) Turbo chargers are the most efficient (using free exhaust momentum) anywhere outside of very low rpm (where backpressure exceeds the pressure ratio).

2) Centrifugals are next, with efficiencies that "approach" turbos but only at VERY VERY high speeds.

3) Twin screw are next.

4) Roots type are last.

The paper even discusses several of the typical pros and cons we always discuss from twin screw manufacturer costs and complexities to bulk and size of units, to centrifugal gearing and dampening requirements from engine variations to low pressure conditions and challenges with turbos and twin screws, etc, etc.

I post this as exhibit to call bullshit on centri blower claims of wild efficiencies that aren't just atypical, but in some claims, impossible or hyper-theoretical.

 

[Andy13186]

Brads times arent that unrealistic, his tune is just super dialed in and he has weight reduction and knows how to drive it well in perfect conditions very cold weather, etc.

I went out earlier today on my e50 tune whipple 3.875 pulley full weight (actually above full weight since I have a 40 lbs trailer hitch, and a full tank of gas, jacking rails, etc. Got a new best 100-150, only ~.2 off my all time best e85 tune 60-130 time which was with less than half a tank and in better conditions. Paddle shifting in drag mode. Should be able to get into the 4s in better conditions with less fuel while probably weighing over 100lbs more than brads car with this whipple, trailer hitch, jacking rails, etc. 5.14 is still my best so far though.

 

[Mach9310]

Whipple 10R80 3.3 upper and ATI lower 19 LBS of boost went consistent 4.3-4.4 60-130 best was 4.2 on the street

What is your tire/suspension set up and what gear did you start the run in? I have the same set up with a 2.875 upper stock lower (18 psi) but haven’t been able to get lower than 4.77 sec due to traction issues.

 

[Sandro6454]

What is your tire/suspension set up and what gear did you start the run in? I have the same set up with a 2.875 upper stock lower (18 psi) but haven’t been able to get lower than 4.77 sec due to traction issues.

315/50/17 ET STREET R and BMR bread and butter package with Viking Crusaders

 

[Mach9310]

315/50/17 ET STREET R and BMR bread and butter package with Viking Crusaders

I have a similar suspension setup with no shocks and on Et Street SS 305/45/17. 3rd gear launch I’m assuming?

 

[Andy13186]

315/50/17 ET STREET R and BMR bread and butter package with Viking Crusaders

Do you do a decent burnout before the runs or do they just work for you with that setup? I have the same tire but after I spin them a few times they seem to stop hooking and now I cant hook even in 4th with a lot less power. I do have pedders coilovers though not really a drag suspension setup but I do have the full stop the hop ultimate package. Also what PSI do you run them at?

 

[Sandro6454]

Do you do a decent burnout before the runs or do they just work for you with that setup? I have the same tire but after I spin them a few times they seem to stop hooking and now I cant hook even in 4th with a lot less power. I do have pedders coilovers though not really a drag suspension setup but I do have the full stop the hop ultimate package. Also what PSI do you run them at?

I clean them off by mashing the throttle for a second prior to doing the pull. I don’t do a burnout and I start from 3rd I had the same kind of issue in colder temps so I told Lund to ramp the timing in for the cooler temps and it worked out better as far as for PSI I would say around 22-24 for rolls and 17 for digs

 

[Andy13186]

New PB 60-130 and 100-150 earlier today, on e50 tune and 3.75 pulley now. I think if I had less gas or 10* cooler it would be in the 4s. Overall pretty happy. I hit the limiter twice on that vette race which is 8400 rpm, oops. Also on indy500s and 20x10 pp1 replica rears, so heavy AF.

 

[cbrtrx]

Do you do a decent burnout before the runs or do they just work for you with that setup? I have the same tire but after I spin them a few times they seem to stop hooking and now I cant hook even in 4th with a lot less power. I do have pedders coilovers though not really a drag suspension setup but I do have the full stop the hop ultimate package. Also what PSI do you run them at?

Once those tires get feathered they stop hooking.

 

[gimmie11s]

New PB 60-130 and 100-150 earlier today, on e50 tune and 3.75 pulley now. I think if I had less gas or 10* cooler it would be in the 4s. Overall pretty happy. I hit the limiter twice on that vette race which is 8400 rpm, oops. Also on indy500s and 20x10 pp1 replica rears, so heavy AF.

Car is fast!!! How much power are you making?

 

[Andy13186]

Car is fast!!! How much power are you making?

770

Sponsored