Kidney bean you don't even own a lancer so really I don't even understand why you getting so defensive about this. What works on an eclipse doesn't work on a lancer. If you want go out and buy a lancer and prove us wrong but at the moment people have had way more success with turbos on a lancer than with superchargers.
Here's info on the turbo dyno I showed.
https://www.evolutionm.net/forums/sh...age+turbo+dyno
Here's the supercharger dyno.
https://www.evolutionm.net/forums/sh...t=supercharger

 

Except that the difference between chocolate and vanilla is purely opinion, it cannot be quantified. The difference between SC and TC can and has been quantified. Just blindly answering someone's question is stupid and in the end isn't helpful.

 

His question isn't stupid, it's a good question. Re-read what I said.

 

Blindly, as in like a blind person, as in without regard to other information. If someone came on here and said "I want to run 150 shot of nitrous on my lancer, what setup is better, NOS or ZEX?" wouldn't it be appropriate to say "hold off sparky, a lancer can't run a 150 shot"? In this case the question is about superchargers. Naturally if you discuss superchargers the corresponding alternative is turbochargers.

 

its amazing that in 5 years these supercharger threads haven't changed a bit, they always end the same way. people being in denial and getting all pissy about it.

i have personally searched and read EVERY single supercharger thread since this website started. Now i can't quote every single positive and negative about doing a supercharger on a lancer, but in a nutshell it is very difficult, laden with problems and produces very little gain.

i don't even know why this is still being discussed, you guys have been here long enough to know how to search properly, you can easily find all the technical data and people who have did the supercharger route before.

 

Superchargers do have their advantages, but IMO those advantages do not overcome their shortcomings. As the dyno showed it's not like superchargers make substantial power below 3500 RPM. It also makes crap torque compared to horsepower. I'm sure some of that is because of the auto transmission but even if you take that into account it's still not amazing. I'm sure you could design a system that is better than the RIPPS system but the problem is you'd be going it alone.

 

That's the problem, you assume everyone has done their research. When you've been here longer you'll realize that that is rarely the case. How many threads a week do we get on basic exhaust questions? How many threads about motor swapping? As a whole people are stupid and lazy and I apply that here, that way I am pleasantly surprised when they do something great rather than disappointed when they crash and burn.

 

I have did the supercharger route. There are issues, but turbos have issues too. The power is less than I wanted. The belt slips. BUT I've got no CEL issues, a perfect idle, and very few maintenance issues. My little sister has been driving the car for the last 6 months with no problems. It did break a belt about 8 months ago, and that's related to my pulley alignment, and yes that is a problem. But the car is at the shop right now, and aside from fixing that problem, they are putting in a P&P head/IM/TB/RPW headers and giving it a fresh tune. So we'll see how it does power-wise in two weeks when I get it back.

 

Here's how I see it, if people are so insecure about their ideas that they're scared away because of something some guy on the internet says, they weren't ready to undertake the project. It's like all the engine swap threads, people (like you) always moan about how people are being too negative and all that, but lets face it, doing an engine swap is not easy and you have to know your ****. The only person who has done the evo swap came on here, said he was doing it, and did it. The same goes for the guy who did the manual transmission swap (I think he completed it successfully). If people just put their thumbs up their asses and throw out answers without any criticism, the community doesn't grow either. It's like science, the scientific community grows because people of all different backgrounds can converge and say what they want to say, even if there is debate about certain things. If everyone agrees, the community dies and there is no drive for variation.
Superchargers do have their advantages, I'd be stupid and hypocritical to say that turbochargers dominate in every way but as the dynos have shown at the moment on lancers turbochargers are the norm and have the most success. This isn't to say that a supercharger can't work, hell getting 200 hp out of a lancer is a damn good accomplishment, but if you plan on improving on the RIPPS system you have a lot of work ahead of you.

 

since when do dynos justify how it will perform on the road? coming out of a curve with a SC, or even NA in some cases, puts you in better position to accelerate than a TC does most of the time. who knows, maybe he cant drive and doesnt know how to keep the rpms above 4K coming out of a curve? in that case, he should definitely stay away from turbo.

 

True, but the same could be said of superchargers. What the dynos do show is how the powerband is setup. The supercharger has a very linear band while the turbocharger definitely has a more curved power output. However, both show similar power below say 4000 RPM. As I'm sure I've said before it's not like the supercharger makes gobs of power below that range, although I'm sure it is more than a turbocharged or NA setup. If you were actually racing or driving spiritedly you'd want the revs to be high in any case, NA, supercharged or turbocharged.

 

Good luck with your supercharger man I hope you get it working for ya.

 

As to the question of why I'm so defensive about discussing supercharging in here when I don't own a lancer...supercharging has some basic facts about it that apply across the board. What works for one may in fact work for the other. Rather than each of us reinventing the wheel, we could pool our knowledge and possibly help each other out.

With regards to asking the mods to close this thread...if supecharging is not a subject that interests you, then just skip over this thread. Why should we not be able to discuss this when we are trying to work out issue in the development of our systems simply because you don't want to? I don't go into every thread about show and shine, for instance, and say things like "chrome wheels are stupid, close this thread".

This thread has been plagued with a waste of ranting back and forth for 2 or three pages now with no constructive discussions since everyone keeps bringing up stuff that they have been asked repeatedly not to. So, I ask one last time...if you can not ADD to the idea of supercharging, please don't. I don't want reasons why you don't think a supercharger is better (such as dyno graphs). Give us concrete information such as lessons learned. The post about the belt alignment issues was a great example. Otherwise, those of you who aren't interested in supercharges are going to force the rest of us to communicate on the subject via PM or email which negates the whole idea of having a forum in the first place.

 

Man that all sounded like a lot of fun. I've cleaned up most of te small not contributing posts but left all the long ones. This thread is done because it is just another one that will go no where while it's open. Sorry this had to be closed due to people not allowing any one to go their own route with their own car. but it's too much of a hassle to keep open.