hold on let me consult the Tom Excuse Generator.

 

Is it like one of those magic 8 ***** that you shake and wait for a answer?

Or do you simply grab Tom by the throat and shake violently and eventually some bullshit excuse will come out.

 

I think the machine is jammed on "waiting for supplier"

 

whoa whoa whoa, a torque converter changes air/fuel ratio? hahahahaha

 

just curious, but how many engines have blown with FFS coldsides?

 

This would be a better question for a m.net (if they would even allow it).. there aren't too may folks here with a SC.

 

I think the parasitic loss of a supercharger prevents any low boost unit from generating decent numbers. Atleast that's how it appears. Mp45, mp62, doesn't seem to matter - run under 10 psi and you just aren't making up enough for the drag. I know a couple guys personally with niiiice SC setups - one in the 250 whp range and another close to 300. But the levels of boost they are running is astronomical, and the amount of dough tied up in the car makes me weep... I think SC guys just have to admit that if they want to keep things to a budget and run low boost levels they won't be making any new waves with HP numbers. Regardless of how much technology they want to throw at it, they are using the wrong mechanical device for hp per psi...

 

Parasitic drag is a factor, though I don't believe it's the biggest one. Positive-displacement, external-compression superchargers simply tend to have very low thermal efficiency as compared to turbochargers. Put simply, they produce more heat. Hot air is less dense than cold air, so at any given level of boost, an inefficient blower will be moving less mass than one which is more efficient.

It's the same old argument the turbo guys get into- "10PSI from turbo X is not the same as 10 PSI from turbo Y." The reason being that at a given pressure ratio and flow rate, turbo Y is more efficient than turbo X- it's producing a cooler, denser charge.