The cobalt is definitely an entry level car on par with the SRT-4. Yes Benzs are supercharged but they're really the only example I can think of save for the big american muscle cars.

 

You're not going to hit 25 PSI with either setup so that's a mute point. I think you are treating superchargers like this end all solution to making power, which they're not.

 

you are also treating turbos the same. and how are you to say that im not going to hit 24 psi. for me, they are the better solution. i think you mean "moot" point. to say that hitting 25 psi is impossible is definitely an overstep. i never in my posts eluded to the fact that to me supercharger where the only way to make power. i merely stated that it would be a more responsive way to make the power that i wanted.

 

You can't hit 25 PSI without a crap load of work, if you did any readings on here you'd know that. I don't honestly think you'd notice that much a difference between a turbo and a supercharger.

 

if you dont think i would notice a difference then you have obviously never driven either. even with a turbo with hardly any lag, you still feel the lag and you can see it in the way a turbo car passes. with a supercharger, when you hit the pedal it goes. that is it. there is no lag and when you hit the pedal you arent waiting on the turbo to catch up on what you are trying to do or having to anticipate what you are going to have to do to keep the turbo spooled through a turn. you just drive as if you had the displacement you really wanted. both are worlds apart. for me and my driving style a supercharger is what i prefer. and as far as hitting 25psi, you can't say that i will never because that is the problem with definite statements. they are often proven wrong. i know there is work involved just because on here my status is newbie doesn't mean by any stretch that i am a newbie in the world of automotive performance. from what i can tell your span seems to be limited to here.

 

If you actually know how to drive you can avoide the lag from a turbocharger. Once you're out of 1st gear you can keep the car in the necessary rev range to keep the turbo spooled and keep the throttle response up. If you really want a supercharger go nuts but be prepared for a lot of R & D since the RIPPS model is the only one out there.

 

i am prepared for the extensive amount of fun that is going to be coming out of my garage, thanks. like i said before. once you drive the setup that suits you best you will never want to go back. personally i would rather focus on position rather than glancing at the boost gauge to assure that i am still spooled to exit a corner.

 

You'll need a boost gauge with a supercharger, at least it would be a good idea.
Just an idea of what the two look like dyno wise.

https://www.evolutionm.net/forums/at...8&d=1081198052
Granted they aren't exactly the same (they differ substantially in peak power) but they address the point nicely. If you compare the two, the turbo setup appears to make power faster than the supercharged setup. The turbo setup also makes gobs more torque even if you take into account the difference in peak hp.

 

to effectively compare graphs the scale has to be the same, in this case they are not. on top of that. no backround info was given for either. for all i know the supercharger graph is from an 8 psi setting and the only thing i know is from prior knowledge that the graph you are giving for the turbo argument is RRM's stage two kit.

 

Less talk more build. I hope your wife is on board for this. Who cares which FI you go with, it's your ride and don't forget to take pictures so the rest of us can enjoy.

We are all car people here, let the man enjoy his project...sheeesh

 

i will start the build as soon as possible. but, my wife wants me to sell my truck because its in texas and im in cali so... im still arguing with her over it. but i will do it. even if it means a divorce(joking)haha. but im going to do it just need some cash.

 

i have talked to robert tallini(RRM builder guy) and he told me that a supercharger for the lancer dont produce the HP and TRQ that the turbo that RRM sells. the cost for the power is not suficient.

 

Ok, let's see if we can get this on track. First and foremost...superchargers don't draw 200 hp...if you can provide factual data that verifies this, please do so...otherwise, we can consider it an uneducated statement.

Second, intercoolers can and have been used on vehicles FROM THE FACTORY with positive displacement (Roots type) superchargers...take a look at the Ford Thunderbird Super Coupe.

Third, there seems to be a few of us who are sincerely interested in pursuing the avenue of supercharging...let's keep this thread focused on that. If you have information on turbocharging that you want to share with the community, please start a thread titled "advice on turbocharging", or something similar, and talk about it to your heart's content.

Since this thread is entitled "advice on supercharging", let's redirect the focus of this thread and provide factual advice, lessons learned, etc. geared towards the end goal of developing a working induction system utilizing superchargers. Some of us want to look into positive displacement superchargers, while others are pursuing centrifugal units...this could actually be of benefit...what one of us learns from our trial and error may still apply to the other.

Disclaimer - I appologize if I hurt someone's feelings with my blunt comments in response to non-productive hog-wash. I am a white, hairy, male, politically incorrect American who is under the impression that the spotted owl tastes like chicken.

 

^search. you will realize supercharging has been covered a million times over the past 5 years. It's not a practical option for the lancer. end of story. there have been like 2 cars who had superchargers and both of them had a bunch of problems and made a max of 200hp.

 

^ I'm glad you see the problem with the whole "search" answer everyone gives. Yes, I'm sure it has been covered over the last 5 years, but as Snap pointed out, it can't be covered clearly because everyone wants to argue about it. As I pointed out before, there are a few of us that are interested in supercharging. I don't mean to be a jerk, but if you're not interested in it, or cannot provide actual data as to problems that are encountered, or ways to make it work, please post elsewhere.

An example of a good post:

A common problem with supercharging is the torsional strain on the driveshaft for the SC due to the extra length (as utilized by RIPP). This leads to premature wear, belt slippage problems, and a "torsional lag" if the throttle is applied to sharply. (this is just an example)

An example of a thought that doesn't need to be posted (SINCE IT ALREADY HAS BEEN 3,343,564,346,463 TIMES):

SC sucks, turbo is better, search, it's been covered umpteen times before, SC is for V8s, SC wastes gas, turbos are easier to plumb, turbo is cheaper, yada, yada, yada...

If you have something productive to say, please say it. If not, post a bulletin on MySpace to share it with your "friends"...