more speculation on the usual debate

[vtec4gs]

perhaps if they rehash the internals on the supercharger for more efficiency they can pull a bit more HP.

But one thing is for sure, the point about no type of intercooling has been proven .. when Curt in Florida ran a 25 shot NOS with his charger (what was it a 12psi pulley), 11.1's were established so we know the thing boosts jsut needs cooling period.

Vortech tried a different approach and ran into safety issues, i.e. the shaft is in the open stretches across the entire engine bay ... thats a no-no for fed regulations

I think the best (and only way of doing a) supercharger kit is to utilize the a/c compressor spot with the charger then pipe it from there thru an intercooler and into the stock intake manifold... ala turbo kits for Hondas.

Maybe there is anotehr way but it'll take mucho work. Even this way I suggested isn't practical because the regular joe-schmoe doesn;t wanna lose his a/c.

Greg

------------------
94 Civic FROG
435HP/289 lb-ft. torque.
11 Second Club.

[lundgren]

More power is possible. I think 240 whp would be there with:

B18C
JRSC 8 psi
Water Injection
J&S Safeguard
3 Inch CAI
Kamakazi Header
Aftermarket Exhaust
Random Tech Cat
Apex'i V-AFC
Cam Gears
310 Injectors
Cartech/Vortech FMU

Add some headwork, a ITR exhaust cam, and some other goodies, I think 255 whp is possible, at 8psi.

Now I know that this is possible with a turbo kit, simply because of the drag the supercharger puts on the engine. But then I think a supercharger is better power, and the stock jrsc kit cannot be beat for what it is.

[Mr Rogers]

Just to set the record straight (cause I don't want to be the fool here) I run 12-13 daily with about a 96-97 octane mix and only plan to run *FULL timing with straight 100 octane at the track only. I am running tommorow and I will be running straight 100 and the 12-13 degrees just to set somewhat of a baseline and I will bump up the timing latter in the season. I am not crazy, nor fool and I don't play roulet with my motor (Not that anybody said I do, but I jsut wanted to say that I don't ) I think that NO2 is going to be the intercooler for me come the end of the summer but for now I am gonna see what she will do I am curious to know if anybody that is running NO2 on their JRSC has a J&S to observe if any "More" det. is being presented?

------------------
98 GS-scR w/ 8psi JRSC, Walbro HO fuel pump, AEM cai, Airmass header, Thermal Exhaust, Skunk Works cam gears, J&S safeguard, Ground Controls and KYB AGX's, and of course to slow down, KVR X-drill F&R rotors and Carbon Kevlar pads and V1 to signal the slowing down and soon to go on a Carbon Fiber diet,RC 310 steriods,and new sticky foot wear of the 555R type

[SSBP]

Now lets add up the money I spent for 225 H.P. and 168 Torque not including the parts that did not work since I sold them.
JRSC $2300
8 psi $100
Water Injection $400
Short Intake $75
DC 4-1 Header $270
RSR Exhaust $400
Total not including labor$3545
Labor, dyno runs and tax$1600
Total $5145

I think a Turbo can be done for same amount of money with more power.

------------------
00 Naples Gold 3.2TL
N/A with 225 H.P. and 216 Torque at the flywheel
All stock and staying that way

[kameleon]

i keep telling you guys WATER INJECTION is tha bomb ( the best) swear by it ,also drink it when i run outta beer!!!!!!!!!!!but no one listens the a new guy , especially when hes CANADIAN.......

[Turbo'd GSR]

I agree with SSBP, nothing against jrsc's.

[JRCivic]

BJ,

Don't be discouraged by all of these doubters that have flamed you here... they all have underestimated the power of a supercharger.

Let us not forget that the FASTEST cars on this planet (Top fuel dragsters and funny cars) are all powered by SUPERCHARGERS... positive displacement roots-style blowers like the JRSC. Incidentally, the closest a turbo has ever been to any of these powerhouse tarmac rockets resides under the cab of the huge diesel truck that tows it from event to event !!!
Very soon now, any one of three of my project cars will begin turning heads all along the East coast... I believe that many of the current doubters will become believers.

Keep watching the board. You will see.

------------------



'93 Civic Si H/B with B18C1, JRSC @ 8psi
Best 1320: 12.68 at 110 mph

[Marc]

JRCIVIC,

Don't forget, the reason why Top Fuel dragsters use roots type superchargers is because that is what is mandated in the rules. Turbos are not allowed. NHRA sets up certain rules they must abide by. Why do think there has never been a Top Fuel dragster powered by a Rotary engine? It's because they are not allowed.

Saying "superchargers are the best" because Top Fuel dragsters use them doesn't mean anything. After all, they also use pushrod V-8's. So by your rationale, we shouldn't be bothering with high output aluminum Japanese DOHC/SOHC I-4 VTEC engines. Instead we should be running domestic pushrod V-8's. Is that what you are saying? Afterall, since Top Fuel uses V-8 engines then they must be the best right?

There is nothing wrong with either method of FI. Lundgren, SSBP, and the others were merely stating their opinion and experience with the JRSC. A lot of people including myself have had quite a bit of trouble lately with the blowers. Many of us are starting to question whether or not we made the right decision. Given the same amount of money spent on a turbo setup it most likely be much faster, easier to upgrade, and we would have fewer detonation problems. However, had we gone turbo and had problems, we would probably be discussing why we should have chosen a blower instead of a turbo.

------------------
Marc
1997 Civic EX, Supercharged


[This message has been edited by Marc (edited May 21, 2000).]

[reddelsol]

I suppose one could make an apologetic argument for supercharged Hondas, in that compared to turboed Hondas they are still in their infancy.

More companies, racers, and individuals have spent more tinkering time with small displacement Honda turbos, compared to Honda based superchargers. Despite advantages of turbo, this also may have something to do with it.

[reddelsol]

Actually JRCcivic still may have a reaonsable point.

Consider shows where special vehicles, rocket cars/ trucks run. No reason a car couldn't be specially built to show that a turbo could run as well or faster than the current Top Fuel group.

Perhaps no company really has an interest in doing that -- but I don't know if that is the reason, or why it wouldn't be a good idea if it can be done.