Which is faster???

[black mamba1]

A 600 rwhp n/a car or a 650 Paxton s/c car everything else being equal? Would the added weight and heat build up of the Paxton system eventually nullify the hp difference?

 

[bluestreak]

Depends on how you're driving, on a road course the S/C car would heat soak and conk out. On the drag strip the throttle response may be enough to make up the difference for the N/A car (whoever hooked up would win) but the S/C car would probably trap higher. On the highway, I would bet on the S/C.

 

[black mamba1]

Depends on how you're driving, on a road course the S/C car would heat soak and conk out. On the drag strip the throttle response may be enough to make up the difference for the N/A car (whoever hooked up would win) but the S/C car would probably trap higher. On the highway, I would bet on the S/C.

I agree on the traction part. I see 800 and 900 hp cars still trapping in the low 11's and high 10's due to traction issues. I raced a 875 hp Viper (mine was stock) from a stop in about 1/8 mile. I had him by 2 cars before I got out of it. It was almost 90 that day and we had been driving hard for about 15 minutes. Heat soak and traction problems were killing him.

 

[Viper X]

An interesting question. You left out the torque ratings of each car. The N/A car would likely have more torque, especially down low. The Paxton cars don't seem to get out of the "hole" very well, likely due to the power it takes to spin the blower. Then when you get the blower spinning pretty fast and / or shift them, if you're not careful, they tend to spin the tires. This is bad in a short race.

I'd put my money on the N/A car in a short, 1/4 mile drag race. In a 1/2 mile it would be close but the Paxton car should win. In the mile, the Paxton car should walk the N/A car pretty good, especially at elevation.

On a road course, the better driver would win. At 600 rwhp, 50 additional rwhp just isn't that much power difference on a road course. The Paxton car would heat soak a bit, but there are things you can do to help this. A larger intercooler system helps, a bigger radiator helps, a vented hood helps, tuning helps, etc.

Funny you should ask this question. On a recent trip to the drags, my 510 rwhp / 535 rwtq N/A GTS ran 11.7 @ 129.4 mph on street tires with the wife driving it.

There were 3 SRT-10's there that day with the basic paxton install. They ran 12.0 to 12.8 and 122 to 125 mph. Two of them had drag radials. Likely the difference was the driver though these folks were pretty upset to get beat by an older heads / cam car. My wife is pretty good at the drags with limited experience. Unlike most guys, she follows directions very well.

In a "roll on" race, like some of us do from time to time, from say 40 to 60 mph or so, the paxton car will walk the N/A car pretty bad.

All in fun.

Dan

 

[RichieSRT10]

My SRT with run flats and just a S/C I ran 11.3 @ 129.

12's with a S/C, someone needs shifting lessons bad, real bad.


Heat soak issues can be resolved with using a large secondary intercooler. Mine has an additional 5 gallons of water and I made 2 back to back runs in Bradenton last year. I ran a 10.40 & then a 10.43 so I feel there was no much of a heat soak issue or time difference. The car DLM built for me is very consistent. I could not come off the line that day since I was running Pirelli P Zeros in 19 and they **** with high horsepower cars unless you paddle it in first gear. They are still better then run craps.

 

[DMan]

I'd think you'd really need to look at the power & torque curves. I expect the NA car would have more power over more curve (flatter) than the centrifugal car, a whipple or kenne bell type blower have flatter curves due to max boost down low. For a choice, although I'm big on supercharging, I'd take the NA power - but SC power does keep things very tame and reliable until power is needed and a stomp yields boost.

 

[ILLSMOQ]

power curves

600rwhp N/A

typical Paxton dyno

looks like the paxton car has it in the power department across the board....that being said I'd also rather have the N/A car.

 

[GR8_ASP]

Hey that's my car!

My choice between a 600 NA vs 650 SC would be the NA car. Area under the torque curve should be higher for the NA car. The dyno above is for a 690 hp SC vs a 610 NA. An 80 hp advantage which tips the scale back in favor of the SC car.

But, as was said earlier, the SC car will have significant power loss at high temps or extended running under boost while the NA car will be much more consistent and will nothave the transition issue between vacuum and boost.

My $0.02

 

[AFL in NJ]

When it comes to turbocharging or supercharging, compressing that air creates heat, higher air temperature will yield less power so intercooling is nearly a neccessity....whether its air to air, air to water, etc. an intercooler will make all the difference. When I had my '94 T-bird Supercoupe, simply jacketing the air to air intercooler with an ice jacket (muiltiple ice packets on each side) made a HUGE difference when it came to short races.

Regards,
Aaron

 

[big-n-italian]

A 600 rwhp n/a car or a 650 Paxton s/c car everything else being equal? Would the added weight and heat build up of the Paxton system eventually nullify the hp difference?

doesnt matter. the RED car will ALWAYS be faster.

 

[ILLSMOQ]

Yes I pulled the graph from your gallery...nice numbers. I figured it was a properly tuned paxton car and would be a good representative for the paxton group...your lowest run on that graph was 663 so I it should allow for a good comparison of the two different approaches to bigger power.

I agree that the paxton would be down on power after heat soak but I still think it will be putting out the same or more power than a 600rwhp N/A car....here is one of my graphs after 8 runs + heat soak and a slipping belt...power is still very close to the 600 RWHP N/A car.

I don't think a paxton car with a stock engine belongs on a road course. We've seen what happens to stock N/A motors after extended road course use...add a Paxton to that and you're asking for trouble. A built 600 rwhp car would be the obvious choice for the road course or any type of extended hard driving sessions. ...it's going to cost quite a bit more than bolting on a paxton though.

If you ask me, if you're just going to be playing around town, bolt on a paxton. If you are going to run this thing very hard and track it...build up the motor.

Hey that's my car!

My choice between a 600 NA vs 650 SC would be the NA car. Area under the torque curve should be higher for the NA car. The dyno above is for a 690 hp SC vs a 610 NA. An 80 hp advantage which tips the scale back in favor of the SC car.

But, as was said earlier, the SC car will have significant power loss at high temps or extended running under boost while the NA car will be much more consistent and will nothave the transition issue between vacuum and boost.

My $0.02

 

[black mamba1]

I have tangled w/ two s/c GTS's on hot days. One was 97 Roe, the other 99 w/ Paxton. Roe was rated at 740 hp flywheel, Paxton at 874 flywheel. I had Belanger full exhaust and Vec 3, thats it. I walked the Roe in the straightaways, the Paxton was a different story. As the day went on I was neck in neck w/ the Paxton and the Roe was not competitive (heat or the driver?). The Paxton car had a much better driver and I rode in his car later, the acceleration seemed insane to me...but when we raced the cars were very close. Maybe he was just being nice!

 

[plumcrazy]

was the paxton an air to air cooled car ?

 

[Steve 00RT/10]

I have tangled w/ two s/c GTS's on hot days. One was 97 Roe, the other 99 w/ Paxton. Roe was rated at 740 hp flywheel, Paxton at 874 flywheel. I had Belanger full exhaust and Vec 3, thats it. I walked the Roe in the straightaways, the Paxton was a different story. As the day went on I was neck in neck w/ the Paxton and the Roe was not competitive (heat or the driver?). The Paxton car had a much better driver and I rode in his car later, the acceleration seemed insane to me...but when we raced the cars were very close. Maybe he was just being nice!

I seriously doubt that you would walk a Roe on the straightaways if the driver was equal to you. It's all about driving skill and corner exit speed. A completely stock Viper with a very good driver will wipe up a TT/SC car with a lesser driver on a road track. I have run my 5 pound ROE at Gingerman in 4th gear all the way around, and with the exception of a couple cars (who were better drivers than me), I pulled every stock Viper in the straights every time out. The stock Vipers were in 3rd gear. I was in 4th. The temp was low 80s.


Steve

 

[Chuck 98 RT/10]

The Paxton car had a much better driver and I rode in his car later, the acceleration seemed insane to me...but when we raced the cars were very close. Maybe he was just being nice!

A 874hp Paxton could easily reach 20+ mph more than your SRT at the end of a straightaway. Navigating a turn at 170mph takes a lot more skill than a 150mph turn. He may have been being nice as you said, or he may have been hitting the brakes waaaaaaaay before the turn. With 874hp I know I would be. Wow.

 

[black mamba1]

was the paxton an air to air cooled car ?

I have no idea.

 

[black mamba1]

I think part of it was how I was driving, b/c I knew they had the power advantage on me I was driving like a maniac...really pushing the car. But the Roe got weaker as the day progressed. I do think I was jumping on full throttle about 1/2 second before the Roe in the straights, but it didnt matter what I did w/ the Paxton. That guy was just as ballsy as I was and I could never catch him. But when we went from a dead stop I waxed him. I was almost 3 cars ahead of him before he hooked up.

 

[ILLSMOQ]

I think part of it was how I was driving, b/c I knew they had the power advantage on me I was driving like a maniac...really pushing the car. But the Roe got weaker as the day progressed. I do think I was jumping on full throttle about 1/2 second before the Roe in the straights, but it didnt matter what I did w/ the Paxton. That guy was just as ballsy as I was and I could never catch him. But when we went from a dead stop I waxed him. I was almost 3 cars ahead of him before he hooked up.

I'll buy your story on waxing them from a dead stop...other than that those two cars should have wasted you during roll on races. I used to run with roe super charged gen II this car would dyno around 600rwhp...By the end of the day after heat soak it was probably putting out somewhere around 550 rwhp - I could never hang with this car it would walk me every time, unless he missed a shift which was rare becuase the guy was granny shifting the thing.

 

[Viper X]

I am tracking my n/a GTS now, not my Paxton car. I did track my Paxton car for one season and had some minor power loss issues on warm days.

At that time, my Paxton car made 728 rwhp. In the straights, even warm, the acceleration was extreme. No n/a Viper came close. Passing was easy and fun, stopping correctly (not overbraking) was a challenge.

Driver skill becomes even more necessary with more power. Throttle applicaton coming out of a turn was sometimes challenging.

As I said above, I'm tracking my n/a GTS now and am much faster due to more practice and being a better driver.

Dan

 

[black mamba1]

Well, I really feel I should have been no where near either of them in the straights. I talked to the Roe guy and he said he had some predetonation problems in the past and I wonder if that was affecting him that day.

But lets just analyze this for a minute...the Paxton does not kick in until in the upper rpm range, in fact, there is slight power and torque loss at lower rpm due to turning the blower. The Paxton equipment/intercooler/hardware, etc added close to 200 lbs to the car according to its owner. The extra heat on a 90 deg day, 200 extra pounds, and slight power loss at lower rpm seems it might explain why he was having such a hard time w/ a bascially stock car except I had full Belanger exhaust, high flow filters, and VEC 3. As far as the Roe, I think he was having problems w/ his system, plus he was not nearly as good of a driver as myself and the other guy.
I have nothing against the blowers, I am thinking of adding one some day. But if I can get 600-625 rwhp and stay competitive I might just leave it at that. There is some really good advice in here on this post.

 

[ILLSMOQ]

But lets just analyze this for a minute...the Paxton does not kick in until in the upper rpm range, in fact, there is slight power and torque loss at lower rpm due to turning the blower. The Paxton equipment/intercooler/hardware, etc added close to 200 lbs to the car according to its owner.

analyzing....

the paxton does not add 200 pounds...more like 70 or so.

there is more power across the board. I ran mine from 2000 rpm in 5th gear against a 500rwhp srt and my car pulled away...

since I seem to be graph happy today...here is another graph. Same car before and after the SC making 6 pounds...maybe your buddy had some belt slip issues too..seems to be really common with these kits.

 

[Kai SRT10]

The Paxton equipment/intercooler/hardware, etc added close to 200 lbs to the car according to its owner.

I had no idea that a blower added that much weight.

My n/a car weighs a little bit less than stock (3360 with a full tank of gas) even though I've added quite a bit of weight with my roll bar, fire supression, and accusump.

I'm no where near a good enough driver to take advantage of the power I've got. I doubt that (for me) adding more power would make me go faster around a track.


EDIT

analyzing....

the paxton does not add 200 pounds...more like 70 or so.
since I seem to be graph happy today...here is another graph. Same car before and after the SC making 6 pounds...maybe your buddy had some belt slip issues too..seems to be really common with these kits.

70 pounds or 200 pounds? Seems like a big difference. What does a paxton car actually weigh?

The original dyno numbers on the graphed car were 505/522 for just headers and exhaust? That's pretty good. My car with headers and exhaust was 454/500 (bone stock was 437/479)

 

[black mamba1]

I thought his number was high also. But he said w/ the intercooler, water tank, and all the hardware he would be surprised if it did not add 200 lbs. But I think he might have been guessing.

 

[black mamba1]

analyzing....

the paxton does not add 200 pounds...more like 70 or so.

there is more power across the board. I ran mine from 2000 rpm in 5th gear against a 500rwhp srt and my car pulled away...

since I seem to be graph happy today...here is another graph. Same car before and after the SC making 6 pounds...maybe your buddy had some belt slip issues too..seems to be really common with these kits

What temperature was it when your dyno runs were done?

 

[ILLSMOQ]

The original dyno numbers on the graphed car were 505/522 for just headers and exhaust?

I know...everyone thinks our san jose dyno is high. With the SC I dyno'd the car up here and then baslined it when I was down at DC performance. It made the very similar numbers....here's another graph...

 

[ILLSMOQ]

these numbers with no smoothing, smoothing the graph out gets rid of all the jaggies in the power curve, it also changes the numbers a little bit...with the smoothing on the 505 rwhp run showed up as 496 rwhp.


kinda getting off topic.

 

[plumcrazy]

the paxton car will still make a ton of power down low so its not like a n/a car is gonna have any real advantage there either.

id like to hear the difference of an air/water cooled paxton car compared to an air/air paxton car on a track. how much more heat soak is the water gonna have over the air ?

 

[ILLSMOQ]

the paxton car will still make a ton of power down low so its not like a n/a car is gonna have any real advantage there either.

exactly...now if we are comparing a paxton car to a roe blower car...that's a different story.

id like to hear the difference of an air/water cooled paxton car compared to an air/air paxton car on a track. how much more heat soak is the water gonna have over the air ?

I would as well. I've felt my air/water cooler after running the car for an hour or so and it's pretty warm but not as hot as I would have expected it to be. I like the idea of a front mount but blocking the radiator with a big intercooler will start to present problems with keeping the engine cool.

 

[GR8_ASP]

The Paxton kit is 70 lbs. But it is in the wrong location for road racing (in front of the front wheel centerline). I do believe it has slowed me down in the turns a little as I am much looser now than I was before. I clearly have power loss on hot days at the track. No question. I would guess a loss of 50 hp or so. I short shift to conserve the engine (5000 rpm) so never really use the power it could provide. But safe is much better than sorry.

Illsmoq that lower power run was because I asked the dyno tech to shut it down early. The power curve was right where it should have been but did not continue to 6000 rpm. I do not think it has lower torque than a stock motor at just about any rpm.

Steve, I don't think that you mentioned you have a lower gear ratio as well, which helps keep you in the power band in 4th. If you had stock gears I think you would end up shifting more like I do (short shifting).

BTW I have now done enough laps with and without the supercharger and at Gingerman (kind of a technical course). I was faster stock than with the supercharger. I have higher straightaway speed with the Paxton but braking is more tentative due to higher speeds and corner speed is lower with the added weight sticking out front.

 

[black mamba1]

The Paxton kit is 70 lbs. But it is in the wrong location for road racing (in front of the front wheel centerline). I do believe it has slowed me down in the turns a little as I am much looser now than I was before. I clearly have power loss on hot days at the track. No question. I would guess a loss of 50 hp or so. I short shift to conserve the engine (5000 rpm) so never really use the power it could provide. But safe is much better than sorry.

Illsmoq that lower power run was because I asked the dyno tech to shut it down early. The power curve was right where it should have been but did not continue to 6000 rpm. I do not think it has lower torque than a stock motor at just about any rpm.

Steve, I don't think that you mentioned you have a lower gear ratio as well, which helps keep you in the power band in 4th. If you had stock gears I think you would end up shifting more like I do (short shifting).

BTW I have now done enough laps with and without the supercharger and at Gingerman (kind of a technical course). I was faster stock than with the supercharger. I have higher straightaway speed with the Paxton but braking is more tentative due to higher speeds and corner speed is lower with the added weight sticking out front.

This must explain my situation. I simply cannot explain it any other way as to why I was not only competitive w/ the higher hp s/c cars, but in many cases actually faster than those two s/c cars on the track.

The Roe car was not competitive in the turns at all, but like I said I believe I walked him in the straights b/c 1.) I jumped on the gas quicker than he, and 2.) He was suffering from heat soak, and 3.) he might have been predetonating and 4.) He was simply not as ballsy and 5.) I have the new PS 2's and his tires sucked.

The Paxton was a beast, but I was shocked I was close to him at all. We drag raced two times, I kicked his ass both times, but again due to traction problems for him, not power. I even let him start first the second time, I passed him when I shifted to second. This brings up the old argument of "usable power". If the Paxton/Roe power can only be used w/ special tires and special circumstances on cool days in straightaways....is it really worth the investment? Like Gr8Asp said, he was faster stock. I am thinking if I maxed my car out to say 600-625 rwhp n/a would this be a more competitive car for 95% of driving situations than a 775 rwhp s/c car?