Sponsored

ESS Centrifugal Mustang Superchargers

andrewtac

Well-Known Member
Joined
Feb 24, 2021
Threads
56
Messages
1,120
Reaction score
572
Location
TX
First Name
mark
Vehicle(s)
F250. 2020 GT 400A
Weight on the end of the crank, while it does add more moment arm there I don't think the data shows that it is anymore likely to cause an issue (N/A, turbo, vortech, PD/screw blowers all have had similar failures at the similar rates). I went vortech because of this, all in now but would not rule out PC if I were to do it again; and the HO kit is set up like the vortech. I thought the ESS belt was similar to the vortech and PC HO kit where it was the same belt that drives all the other accessories. If so I do not see who it can be as easy to change as the PC (none-HO). On the vortech you can change a support to a bolt and then it is like changing the factory belt again (you don't need to take the supercharger bracket apart), but not like a smaller dedicated belt on the side would be.
Sponsored

 

LSchicago

Well-Known Member
Joined
May 11, 2018
Threads
92
Messages
2,929
Reaction score
2,535
Location
Illinois
First Name
Lloyd
Vehicle(s)
2018 Mustang GT/A 301A 5.0
That is what most people say. Are you liking your ESS kit? What is your opinion on the quality and fitment compared to other Centi kits? I am leaning towards ESS for people like them and say they build boost quicker then other systems. Good luck
ESS rates their pulleys at less boost than they actually produce, so that illusion makes sense.
 

dead_inside

Well-Known Member
Joined
Nov 22, 2019
Threads
14
Messages
466
Reaction score
1,259
Location
PNW
Vehicle(s)
16 GT Prem PP
Looking for some input here. I have the PP 3.73s and think a little centri power up top would be a nice combo, so I have been really interested in a G2 kit. However I cant get anyone to tune for it without requiring 1050x injectors and a BAP. For reference the stage 1 Whipple kit comes with 55 lb/hr injectors as the only fuel mod for up to 750 crank HP. So for my intended power level with this kit, under 600whp on solely 91 pump, it appears I am seemingly stuck over paying for overkill supporting mods. I am not trying to be cheap on fuel by any means but it kinda kills the value of the kit and introduces some added risk to my stock fuel pump for not much in return.

I would be happy to install a DW400 instead of a BAP but now I open myself to hot start issues and it seems I would be doing all of this to support power levels above where I'm trying to be. Again, I am not wanting to be cheap when it comes to fuel.

Despite all of my research, I am still new to boost. So I am open to learning if I am missing something. Any wisdom is appreciated.
 

Brad1810r80

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jul 22, 2021
Threads
16
Messages
517
Reaction score
493
Location
Huntsville AL
First Name
Brad
Vehicle(s)
2018 Mustang 2018 F150
Do lu47 injectors $200 and bap be done it will support 700 or so cost under 500. If buy used cheaper than that.



Looking for some input here. I have the PP 3.73s and think a little centri power up top would be a nice combo, so I have been really interested in a G2 kit. However I cant get anyone to tune for it without requiring 1050x injectors and a BAP. For reference the stage 1 Whipple kit comes with 55 lb/hr injectors as the only fuel mod for up to 750 crank HP. So for my intended power level with this kit, under 600whp on solely 91 pump, it appears I am seemingly stuck over paying for overkill supporting mods. I am not trying to be cheap on fuel by any means but it kinda kills the value of the kit and introduces some added risk to my stock fuel pump for not much in return.

I would be happy to install a DW400 instead of a BAP but now I open myself to hot start issues and it seems I would be doing all of this to support power levels above where I'm trying to be. Again, I am not wanting to be cheap when it comes to fuel.

Despite all of my research, I am still new to boost. So I am open to learning if I am missing something. Any wisdom is appreciated.
 

LSchicago

Well-Known Member
Joined
May 11, 2018
Threads
92
Messages
2,929
Reaction score
2,535
Location
Illinois
First Name
Lloyd
Vehicle(s)
2018 Mustang GT/A 301A 5.0
Looking for some input here. I have the PP 3.73s and think a little centri power up top would be a nice combo, so I have been really interested in a G2 kit. However I cant get anyone to tune for it without requiring 1050x injectors and a BAP. For reference the stage 1 Whipple kit comes with 55 lb/hr injectors as the only fuel mod for up to 750 crank HP. So for my intended power level with this kit, under 600whp on solely 91 pump, it appears I am seemingly stuck over paying for overkill supporting mods. I am not trying to be cheap on fuel by any means but it kinda kills the value of the kit and introduces some added risk to my stock fuel pump for not much in return.

I would be happy to install a DW400 instead of a BAP but now I open myself to hot start issues and it seems I would be doing all of this to support power levels above where I'm trying to be. Again, I am not wanting to be cheap when it comes to fuel.

Despite all of my research, I am still new to boost. So I am open to learning if I am missing something. Any wisdom is appreciated.
Lund tuned my car for E85 on 95# 1000Cc injectors. About 850RW now. 95# injectors are plenty for my setup. Big difference though is that I have a gen 3 with DI also. Makes sense that they want 1050's for a gen 2 car, as you don't have the benefit of dual injection.
 

Sponsored

TEXAS HEAT

Well-Known Member
Joined
May 25, 2016
Threads
37
Messages
705
Reaction score
278
Location
TEXAS
Vehicle(s)
2019 Mustang GT PP1 A10
Weight on the end of the crank, while it does add more moment arm there I don't think the data shows that it is anymore likely to cause an issue (N/A, turbo, vortech, PD/screw blowers all have had similar failures at the similar rates). I went vortech because of this, all in now but would not rule out PC if I were to do it again; and the HO kit is set up like the vortech. I thought the ESS belt was similar to the vortech and PC HO kit where it was the same belt that drives all the other accessories. If so I do not see who it can be as easy to change as the PC (none-HO). On the vortech you can change a support to a bolt and then it is like changing the factory belt again (you don't need to take the supercharger bracket apart), but not like a smaller dedicated belt on the side would be.
My problem with hanging the factory harmonic balancer further out at the very end of the crankshaft is that you're changing the factory balancing of the rotating assembly. Anytime you add weight or mass at the very end of a rotating object you change the effect that the mass has on the entire rotating assembly. The further from the hub you hang the weight the greater the effect it has. It may be a marginal effect, but not one that I'm comfortable subjecting my engine to, especially when it revs to 7500rpm. If this were not the case, why did PC manufacture a crank support that utilizes a rolling element bearing to support that additional load? I think the answer is because they eventually realized that it was a problematic design.
 

andrewtac

Well-Known Member
Joined
Feb 24, 2021
Threads
56
Messages
1,120
Reaction score
572
Location
TX
First Name
mark
Vehicle(s)
F250. 2020 GT 400A
My problem with hanging the factory harmonic balancer at the very end of the crankshaft is that you're changing the factory balancing of the rotating assembly. Anytime you add weight or mass at the very end of a rotating object you change the effect that the mass has on the entire rotating assembly. It may be a marginal effect, but not one that I'm comfortable subjecting my engine to, especially when it revs to 7500rpm. If this were not the case, why did PC manufacture a crank support that utilizes a rolling element bearing to support that additional load? I think the answer is because they eventually realized that this is a potentially problematic design.
This is what led me to vortech, but I have since thought otherwise as there are many more with no support running strong and not breaking cranks.

Perhaps they made the support to sale them as they were around before the coyote and sold then too.

I know there is a difference, but after looking for patterns this doesn't seem to matter. I realize my sample size is small, but it would seem we'd hear about it more often if it was enough to make a difference.
 

LSchicago

Well-Known Member
Joined
May 11, 2018
Threads
92
Messages
2,929
Reaction score
2,535
Location
Illinois
First Name
Lloyd
Vehicle(s)
2018 Mustang GT/A 301A 5.0
My problem with hanging the factory harmonic balancer further out at the very end of the crankshaft is that you're changing the factory balancing of the rotating assembly. Anytime you add weight or mass at the very end of a rotating object you change the effect that the mass has on the entire rotating assembly. The further from the hub you hang the weight the greater the effect it has. It may be a marginal effect, but not one that I'm comfortable subjecting my engine to, especially when it revs to 7500rpm. If this were not the case, why did PC manufacture a crank support that utilizes a rolling element bearing to support that additional load? I think the answer is because they eventually realized that it was a problematic design.
It's more of a hardcore part. Generally, those cranks don't fail under 1,000 RWHP. It can fail over 1,000RW even on Turbo cars. It's also good revenue for PC for those guys making 600-800RW who are paranoid.
 

Jonyxz

Well-Known Member
Joined
Apr 16, 2017
Threads
4
Messages
354
Reaction score
269
Location
San Juan, PR
Vehicle(s)
2019 5.0 401A 10R80
Looking for some input here. I have the PP 3.73s and think a little centri power up top would be a nice combo, so I have been really interested in a G2 kit. However I cant get anyone to tune for it without requiring 1050x injectors and a BAP. For reference the stage 1 Whipple kit comes with 55 lb/hr injectors as the only fuel mod for up to 750 crank HP. So for my intended power level with this kit, under 600whp on solely 91 pump, it appears I am seemingly stuck over paying for overkill supporting mods. I am not trying to be cheap on fuel by any means but it kinda kills the value of the kit and introduces some added risk to my stock fuel pump for not much in return.

I would be happy to install a DW400 instead of a BAP but now I open myself to hot start issues and it seems I would be doing all of this to support power levels above where I'm trying to be. Again, I am not wanting to be cheap when it comes to fuel.

Despite all of my research, I am still new to boost. So I am open to learning if I am missing something. Any wisdom is appreciated.
Wengerd Performance had no issue tuning mine with lu52 injectors and bap.
Made 633whp on largest pulley(lowest boost) and stock cats. I'm very happy with it
 

Jonyxz

Well-Known Member
Joined
Apr 16, 2017
Threads
4
Messages
354
Reaction score
269
Location
San Juan, PR
Vehicle(s)
2019 5.0 401A 10R80
ESS rates their pulleys at less boost than they actually produce, so that illusion makes sense.
Its actually not that far. I see 6.5psi(on the 6.5psi pulley)at aprox 7100rpm.
Ofcourse the more you rev it the higher the boost goes. At rev limiter I'm at 8psi

VideoCapture_20211108-150823.jpg


VideoCapture_20211108-150851.jpg
 

Sponsored

SolarFlare

Well-Known Member
Joined
Aug 24, 2015
Threads
76
Messages
4,019
Reaction score
2,199
Location
S. Fla
Vehicle(s)
2015 CO GT
Only problem with Procharger “hanging an additional weight in front of the crank” is that alllll the online mechanics and FB experts would chime in and spread the hearsay that the snouts would fall off the car soon after install.

1. Crank supports for back 30 years

2. first crank support was developed for whipples

3. Procharger saw the product about to be offered by an out of the country company and beat them to the punch by offering the product because…what company doesn’t like noney
 

Veteran

Well-Known Member
Joined
Aug 12, 2018
Threads
19
Messages
369
Reaction score
250
Location
Italy
Vehicle(s)
2020 GT white
Only problem with Procharger “hanging an additional weight in front of the crank” is that alllll the online mechanics and FB experts would chime in and spread the hearsay that the snouts would fall off the car soon after install.

1. Crank supports for back 30 years

2. first crank support was developed for whipples

3. Procharger saw the product about to be offered by an out of the country company and beat them to the punch by offering the product because…what company doesn’t like noney
I can’t recall where I read it in these forums, but didn’t PC steal the idea from an Australian company ?
 

AZ18yote

Well-Known Member
Joined
Nov 24, 2017
Threads
11
Messages
3,220
Reaction score
1,523
Location
Arizona
First Name
Bryan
Vehicle(s)
2018 Mustang GT Prem PP Magnetic
I can’t recall where I read it in these forums, but didn’t PC steal the idea from an Australian company ?
You may be thinking of the phenolic spacer scenario with VMP and MFP? There was a dispute some time back between the two (MFP is Australian based).
 

larr12

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jul 9, 2020
Threads
13
Messages
822
Reaction score
1,050
Location
USA
First Name
Alberto
Vehicle(s)
2020 Mustang PP1
I can’t recall where I read it in these forums, but didn’t PC steal the idea from an Australian company ?
Yeap

You may be thinking of the phenolic spacer scenario with VMP and MFP? There was a dispute some time back between the two (MFP is Australian based).
And yes
Sponsored

 
 




Top