Magna Charger Vs Pro Charger
04-29-2006, 06:09 PM
#61
I guess I just don't get it...
At 10psi and under those controlled conditions, the radix made more power and more torque at every single graph point. I don't see how that can be argued.
Could the D1SC spin more boost? Sure, but its going to have the same curve up to 10psi... Is a radix the right choice for someone wanting to run 15psi? No, and I think Brian would be the first person to say so, so why would you compare a d1sc at 15psi to a radix at 15psi?
I've reread Brian's post many times and at no point did he say a Radix is better than a D1SC for anyone or in any situation. All he's saying is that under these controlled conditions, 10psi does equal 10psi, conventional internet wisdom aside. The proof is right there...
If you want to dispute that, fine, set up your own tests using whatever compressors you want, but using the same block, heads, cam, tune, gas, and under the same ambient conditions, and show big differences in hp. Or just plain show any evidence that your ideas have more basis than "I think it is this way".
Don't turn this into something it isn't (a brand name bias pissing match [used that just for Grippy
]) and accept it for what it is: information.
At 10psi and under those controlled conditions, the radix made more power and more torque at every single graph point. I don't see how that can be argued.
Could the D1SC spin more boost? Sure, but its going to have the same curve up to 10psi... Is a radix the right choice for someone wanting to run 15psi? No, and I think Brian would be the first person to say so, so why would you compare a d1sc at 15psi to a radix at 15psi?
I've reread Brian's post many times and at no point did he say a Radix is better than a D1SC for anyone or in any situation. All he's saying is that under these controlled conditions, 10psi does equal 10psi, conventional internet wisdom aside. The proof is right there...
If you want to dispute that, fine, set up your own tests using whatever compressors you want, but using the same block, heads, cam, tune, gas, and under the same ambient conditions, and show big differences in hp. Or just plain show any evidence that your ideas have more basis than "I think it is this way".
Don't turn this into something it isn't (a brand name bias pissing match [used that just for Grippy
]) and accept it for what it is: information.
04-29-2006, 06:13 PM
#62
Originally Posted by TurboBerserker
I guess I just don't get it...
At 10psi and under those controlled conditions, the radix made more power and more torque at every single graph point. I don't see how that can be argued.
Could the D1SC spin more boost? Sure, but its going to have the same curve up to 10psi... Is a radix the right choice for someone wanting to run 15psi? No, and I think Brian would be the first person to say so, so why would you compare a d1sc at 15psi to a radix at 15psi?
I've reread Brian's post many times and at no point did he say a Radix is better than a D1SC for anyone or in any situation. All he's saying is that under these controlled conditions, 10psi does equal 10psi, conventional internet wisdom aside. The proof is right there...
If you want to dispute that, fine, set up your own tests using whatever compressors you want, but using the same block, heads, cam, tune, gas, and under the same ambient conditions, and show big differences in hp. Or just plain show any evidence that your ideas have more basis than "I think it is this way".
Don't turn this into something it isn't (a brand name bias pissing match [used that just for Grippy]) and accept it for what it is: information.
At 10psi and under those controlled conditions, the radix made more power and more torque at every single graph point. I don't see how that can be argued.
Could the D1SC spin more boost? Sure, but its going to have the same curve up to 10psi... Is a radix the right choice for someone wanting to run 15psi? No, and I think Brian would be the first person to say so, so why would you compare a d1sc at 15psi to a radix at 15psi?
I've reread Brian's post many times and at no point did he say a Radix is better than a D1SC for anyone or in any situation. All he's saying is that under these controlled conditions, 10psi does equal 10psi, conventional internet wisdom aside. The proof is right there...
If you want to dispute that, fine, set up your own tests using whatever compressors you want, but using the same block, heads, cam, tune, gas, and under the same ambient conditions, and show big differences in hp. Or just plain show any evidence that your ideas have more basis than "I think it is this way".
Don't turn this into something it isn't (a brand name bias pissing match [used that just for Grippy
]) and accept it for what it is: information.
04-29-2006, 06:31 PM
#63
what i am sugesting is that most people tune to the limit of their fuel. on 92octane that might be 9psi on a radix and 12psi with the procharger. all i am sugesting is that there are many diferent ways to configure a test and the way this test was ran ignors the typical way that a procharger is run(a few peek psi more than the turbo/radix guys).
04-29-2006, 06:52 PM
#64
TECH Enthusiast
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Western WA
Posts: 572
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thanks, Blown Chevy!
Brian,
I for one want to express my gratitude and appreciation for the hard work, time, and money that you and others put into doing both this test and the one comparing the Magnuson and the Whipple/Lysholm blowers. As you said, this information is not available anywhere else. It is definitely throwing a monkey wrench into some pre-conceived notions and "web-truths" about FI, but unfortunately these die hard. A very wise Person once said "None are so blind as those who refuse to see, none are so deaf as those who refuse to hear".
One question I do have. If you look at the graphs, the centrifugal, as expected, has boost that rises approximately with the square of the rpm. However, the Radix boost rises roughly linearly with rpm ( a little faster at low speeds). With my truck, the boost hits near max. at about 1700-2000 rpms, and then rises maybe 1 psi from there to redline at 6000. This is true with both the old 3.7" pulley and the current 3.25" pulley, just the numbers are different. I always thought this was the way positive displacement blowers were supposed to behave. Could you please shed some light on this?
Anyway, thanks again for the excellent information, and please continue to share with us. Some of us DO appreciate it (and others could use some training in tact and diplomacy
).
I for one want to express my gratitude and appreciation for the hard work, time, and money that you and others put into doing both this test and the one comparing the Magnuson and the Whipple/Lysholm blowers. As you said, this information is not available anywhere else. It is definitely throwing a monkey wrench into some pre-conceived notions and "web-truths" about FI, but unfortunately these die hard. A very wise Person once said "None are so blind as those who refuse to see, none are so deaf as those who refuse to hear".
One question I do have. If you look at the graphs, the centrifugal, as expected, has boost that rises approximately with the square of the rpm. However, the Radix boost rises roughly linearly with rpm ( a little faster at low speeds). With my truck, the boost hits near max. at about 1700-2000 rpms, and then rises maybe 1 psi from there to redline at 6000. This is true with both the old 3.7" pulley and the current 3.25" pulley, just the numbers are different. I always thought this was the way positive displacement blowers were supposed to behave. Could you please shed some light on this?
Anyway, thanks again for the excellent information, and please continue to share with us. Some of us DO appreciate it (and others could use some training in tact and diplomacy
).
04-29-2006, 07:44 PM
#65
Hey Jim, I wasn't responding to your posts specifically. I think you're right -- the test was run in a way that ignores tuning, etc., because it was after a different point. The strength of a cent s/c is more peak boost as you say and less "under the curve" boost, but the intent of the test was to show 10psi = 10psi.
And for Brian's sake -- even if this test is biased against hardcore drag racers who want to run higher boost, this information is very valid for 95% of the people who consider FI.
And for Brian's sake -- even if this test is biased against hardcore drag racers who want to run higher boost, this information is very valid for 95% of the people who consider FI.
04-30-2006, 08:35 AM
#66
TECH Senior Member
iTrader: (6)
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Decatur, AL
Posts: 5,257
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Blownchevy, I was looking at the graphs again and was wondering what size pulley is on the Radix? I'm thinking 3.1-3.0??? The reason i ask this is my 4.8 would build pretty much max boost by 3k and maybe creap another .5 - 1lb to 6500. I had a 3.0 pulley on it and was pushing 12.5lbs. Just currious how fast, or slow, it was spinning to have a 2lb jump in boost from 3k to max.
Also, I notice that the IAT's are scaled on the maggie vs whipple test but they aren't in this test. Do you have a graph with them on it or were they even recorded in this test?
Also, I notice that the IAT's are scaled on the maggie vs whipple test but they aren't in this test. Do you have a graph with them on it or were they even recorded in this test?
Last edited by mjhoward; 04-30-2006 at 08:52 AM.
04-30-2006, 09:01 PM
#67
LS1Tech Sponsor
iTrader: (10)
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Spring Lake, MI
Posts: 4,148
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I am not trying to get shitty here. I just agree with Parish, D1 for the track, it will own, dyno graphs aside. The Maggie has its place on milder street drivin vehicles.
04-30-2006, 09:12 PM
#68
Former Moderator :(
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: BOULEVARDS OF BOOST CALIFORNIA
Posts: 586
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by hellbents10
I am not trying to get shitty here. I just agree with Parish, D1 for the track, it will own, dyno graphs aside. The Maggie has its place on milder street drivin vehicles.
Last edited by Crash Dummy; 04-30-2006 at 09:52 PM.
05-01-2006, 01:28 AM
#69
Originally Posted by TurboBerserker
Hey Jim, I wasn't responding to your posts specifically. I think you're right -- the test was run in a way that ignores tuning, etc., because it was after a different point. The strength of a cent s/c is more peak boost as you say and less "under the curve" boost, but the intent of the test was to show 10psi = 10psi.
And for Brian's sake -- even if this test is biased against hardcore drag racers who want to run higher boost, this information is very valid for 95% of the people who consider FI.
And for Brian's sake -- even if this test is biased against hardcore drag racers who want to run higher boost, this information is very valid for 95% of the people who consider FI.
Just so there's no questions as to why these tests were performed or how they were done...
Every type of F/I has it's place. We were not out to try and start any pissing contests (ala Grippy).
These tests were simply for our own data and to disprove a lot of myths about our units. The decision was to test boost for boost on a standard off the shelf c.a.r.b. approved application. Meaning, the guy that buys it off the shelf and runs 8 pounds. then we decided to bump it up a notch for the guy that hit's the track on the weekends and runs 10 pounds. And these were not tested kit for kit, these were optimally tuned for each unit all using the same exact componets such as, intake, intercooler, etc. It was a 100% unit vs. unit, not kit vs. kit. We all know that if you run a turbo up tp 20 lbs, you're gonna make a ton of power. This was simply data aquistion for real life applications. Plain and simple. The fact that it was "leaked out" just sorta happened. Please take this for what it is, just a lot of good onfo for you guys to see.
05-01-2006, 10:05 AM
#70
Staging Lane
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Louisiana
Posts: 81
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I remember a similar test between a KB, turbo, and a Vortec unit. Pretty much the same curves between the KB and Vortech as shown with this test but the centri carried much more power into the upper rpms. Also a P1-SC, SC-1, or SC-2 would have been a better choice as they do hit harder in the low rpms than the D1 until about 3500 rpm where the D1 takes off. This test does show the difference between compressors but as far as the track is concerned I wouldn't take this data to heart. PSI - PSI is fine for set test beds but isn't realistic for actual applications. You can run considerably more boost on a centrifugal without lunching the motor than you could a positive displacement blower on any factory vechicle. That's dyno proven as well as track proven.
The turbo wipes the floor with all of them though....
The turbo wipes the floor with all of them though....