Acura RSX Type S Supercharger Help!!!!

I am looking at putting a supercharger on an 2003 Acura RSX type S. What is the best one out there? I will be using this to drive to work and back as well, so I need somthing that doesn't really kill my gas milage at lower RPM's. But I also want somthing that gives good power gain at mid and high RPM's ( Like 4 to 6 Thousand). Any advice would be great THANKS!!!!

uh dude... you might want to check where you're posting this... this is a NISSAN area... this is where you want to be...

http://www.automotiveforums.com/vbulletin/forumdisplay.php?f=1461

or

.... and i see you've already posted in the fi section on the honda page... that's great...

Thread moved to appropriate forum.

Jackson Racing has two superchargers, a milder street kit and a more performance oriented race kit. There's also Comptech, but i'd recommend the JR.

Get a turbo.

I always thought that the S/C stays on all the time, so that no matter what, your gas mileage is going to decrease. I believe the turbo only goes on after a certain RPM's so that might be the way to go in terms of gas usage. Correct me if I'm wrong.

JR seems the way to go in terms of S/C like crazy said. In terms of turbo there are at least 5 or more to choose from. I would recommend the hondata KPro to manage the computer prior to installing either a S/C or turbo. Some kits already come with their own computer manager, but I think that Hondata is probably the best. And you can tune your own car if you know what you're doing.

I always thought that the S/C stays on all the time, so that no matter what, your gas mileage is going to decrease. I believe the turbo only goes on after a certain RPM's so that might be the way to go in terms of gas usage. Correct me if I'm wrong.

sort of... s/c's are belt driven, meaning they are connected directly to the crank via a belt, so they're rpm variable and always spinning making boost(when the throttle is open at least)

now a turbo depends on the amount of exhaust your engine is putting out at any given time to make boost.. the more exhaust, the more backpressure is produced between the turbine and engine, which increases the exhaust velocity, spinning the turbo faster... this, depending on the car, usually doesn't take very long with the stock turbo(s). for example my 88 z31T hits full boost at around 2300-2500 rpm.. however, once you start increasing the boost or upgrading the turbo it generally takes longer to get to full boost.. which is where the gas guzzling begins...

with turbo's it's possible to drive as much 'off boost' as possible to increase your gas mileage, but what fun would that be?:evillol:

Allow me to elaborate a bit on what my homey g dawg mack skillet D said.

Supercharger: There are more than one kind of supercharger. If you want specifics on the pros and cons on all of them, let me know. For now, I'll just go over the basics. Superchargers are belt driven directly off the crank. This saps power from the engine in order to make it...as much as 30hp for every 100hp produced in some s/c designs! But, one "benefit" of a belt driven blower is that there is no time required for "spool up" as is the case with turbos. To some people, this is the holy grail. In my oppinion, this doesn't matter anymore. Back in the day, sure, this was the shit. But modern turbo technology (variable vane technology, hybrid turbos, etc...again...want details? Lemme know) has, more or less, made the belt driven s/c obsolete.

Turbocharger: Technically a turbo IS a supercharger. Difference is a turbo isn't belt driven, it is driven by gasses (more so heat than the actual exhaust GAS...just some FYI) expelled through the exhaust. This is why turbos are often referred to as "free power". Sure, they make a tiny bit of backpressure in the exhaust system, but with a larger aftermarket exhaust system and the added power the turbo produces, added back pressure is so miniscule that it's not even worth mention. The major "draw back" that turbos have been said to have is lag. This is a bit of a misnomer. What is undesirable about turbos isn't actually "lag"...it's actually slow boost response. And, once again, I'm not going to go waaaaaaaaaay into detail again unless requested. This could easily turn into a reaaaaaaaaaaally long post. All that is relevent now is that turbos will yield better gas mileage when driven sensibly. Belt driven superchargers are only RPM dependent. Turbos are RPM dependent AND load dependent. This means, as you are loafin down the freeway, the turbo is barely even spinning because there is no load. No boost means no added fuel useage. This means better mileage.

Read the "Turbo vs. Supercharger" thread in the Forced Induction part of the "Cars in general" forum.

Go turbo.

Practically speaking, I've come to realize that just turbocharging a Type S is not the best option unless you have the money and common sense to do it right. The car already has such high compression that the amount of boost you can responsibly and reliably run with stock internals isn't really worth the cost and hassle IMO. If you have the money to upgrade internals, fuel management, etc., then it makes sense. If you want a more reliable daily driver setup just go NA with the money you would have spent on the turbo kit.

See...forced induction...I'm pretty familiar with. The specific application of forced induction to high compression little 4 bangers...not too familiar with. lol I wouldn't THINK it would be the best thing to do when you're running 11:1 comp or whatever these things are running.

^Detonation is a beautiful thing, right? Then again, if you're shortsighted and overeager with your modifications, I suppose you deserve it.

Off topic, that's a beautiful Z. My old man had an 88 a while back. Love those cars.

Thanks man. The 86 in my avatar isn't around any more, but it is in spirit. The engine in my sig is out of that car. The chassis met its demise at the hands of a REALLY oddly placed curb. The one I have now is an 88. It's great. Love the Z31s. I'm looking for my 4th...:biggrin:

Oh yea...you pile a bunch of boost on top of some 11:1 compression and you're just ASKING for some blown head gaskets and melted pistons.

Oh yea...you pile a bunch of boost on top of some 11:1 compression and you're just ASKING for some blown head gaskets and melted pistons.

Not quite true. If you do upgrade to a turbo on the RSX, you have to change your internals as well. If you do leave the stock internals you will have damage as you suggested. Like S777 said, it's a matter of $$ and having it done correctly.

Turbos are RPM dependent AND load dependent. This means, as you are loafin down the freeway, the turbo is
barely even spinning because there is no load. No boost means no added fuel useage. This means better
mileage.
I've been thinking of turboing my rsx-s, but I was trying to figure out how vacuum assist brakes work on a
turboed car. Assuming "load" is the percentage the throttle body blade is open(right?), it makes perfect
sense. Let go of the gas, the blade closes, no boost... Now you said that even at freeway speeds there is
no boost being created. In the rsx-s in 6th gear, 60mph is 3000rpms, 80mph/4000rpms, 100mph/5000rpms(roughly). Why is boost not being created at those rpm's? The throttle body has to be at opened a good amount to maintain those engine speeds, right???
One more thing what is a waste gate?
Thanks , Cliff

Not quite true. If you do upgrade to a turbo on the RSX, you have to change your internals as well. If you do leave the stock internals you will have damage as you suggested. Like S777 said, it's a matter of $$ and having it done correctly.

Thanks for stating that which I assumed everyone else would assume. EVERYTHING with cars comes down to how much money you have to spend.

I've been thinking of turboing my rsx-s, but I was trying to figure out how vacuum assist brakes work on a
turboed car. Assuming "load" is the percentage the throttle body blade is open(right?), it makes perfect
sense. Let go of the gas, the blade closes, no boost... Now you said that even at freeway speeds there is
no boost being created. In the rsx-s in 6th gear, 60mph is 3000rpms, 80mph/4000rpms, 100mph/5000rpms(roughly). Why is boost not being created at those rpm's? The throttle body has to be at opened a good amount to maintain those engine speeds, right???
One more thing what is a waste gate?
Thanks , Cliff

Load isn't necessarily just how much the throttle is open. It's how much load you'r putting on the engine. How fast you're going is irrelevent. How much throttle it requires to maintain that speed is irrelevent. When you're maintaining speed, you're not putting any (much) load on the engine. It's not having to work (much) because it's already up to speed. This is why the turbo isn't making any (much) boost. Now mash the gas at 60...you're esentially telling the car "hey...go faster". This puts a load...strain...whatever on the engine which produces heat. (Quick side note: A turbo doesn't use the exhaust GAS to spin as much as it uses unused HEAT IN the exhaust to spin the turbine. Sure, the gas contributes, but the heat does more. The power in the engine, for simplicity's sake, comes from the heat of the fuel burning. Your engine getting hot...yup...that's wasted energy.) This heat is what the turbo utilizes to make more power. The boost shoots up. How little the time between when you mash the gas and when the boost hits the max set limit is known as boost response. Sluggish boost response is what is undesireable when it comes to turbo...this is mistakenly referred to as "lag".

This is a good question, man. It would be easier to answer if I hadn't had a few Molson XXX's. I'd be happy to clarify something if you'd like.

A waste gate is how turbo boost levels are regulated. Without it, a turbo would just keep spinning faster and faster and faster until it eventually flies apart. This is known as overboost. Overboost...baaaaaad. Wanna know HOW a wastegate works, lemme know.

Load isn't necessarily just how much the throttle is open. It's how much load you'r putting on the engine. How fast you're going is irrelevent. How much throttle it requires to maintain that speed is irrelevent. When you're maintaining speed, you're not putting any (much) load on the engine.

not exactly my half-cut homey g dawg mack skillet... the faster you go, the more wind resistance/rolling resistance/basically every other relevant resistance.. the car needs to work harder to overcome those resistances as long as the car is on a flat/positive incline (negative incline to a point as well but that's getting too complicated lol)

but yeah, in a perfect world you wouldn't require any power to keep rolling on a flat surface.. oh, and throttle position is always relevant:P

Thanks for stating that which I assumed everyone else would assume. EVERYTHING with cars comes down to how much money you have to spend.


You're welcome. :rolleyes: A lot of people on this forum are newbies (originator's post count might be a clue) at modifying their automobiles, so you can't assume that they already know these things. I was just re-stating that you basically just can't buy a turbo and pop it in there. You will have to spend much more money buying other internals such as fuel rails, cams, valve springs......

Sorry if you experienced guys find this annoying, but I try to cater to the guys/gals that don't know everything about the RSX.

Don't take what I said above the wrong way. I'm glad you and Delerious chimed in and gave some very useful info. on turbos / superchargers. :bigthumb:

The irony of the situation is that the original poster most likely never figured out how to find the response to his post. Either that or he's lurking in the shadows, reading intently and biding his time...

In any event, at least he paved the way for some bi-partisan banter to break up the monotony.

not exactly my half-cut homey g dawg mack skillet... the faster you go, the more wind resistance/rolling resistance/basically every other relevant resistance.. the car needs to work harder to overcome those resistances as long as the car is on a flat/positive incline (negative incline to a point as well but that's getting too complicated lol)

but yeah, in a perfect world you wouldn't require any power to keep rolling on a flat surface.. oh, and throttle position is always relevant:P

Half-cut...that's a new one. :p

Sure, it will always take more throttle to maintain speed as your speed increases...but this doesn't but more load on the engine. The engine's doing work, but it's not INCREASING the amount of work it is performing. The scientific definition of work is "The transfer of energy from one physical system to another, especially the transfer of energy to a body by the application of a force that moves the body in the direction of the force." --Dictionary.com

In other words, work = moving something. Yes, the engine is making the car move when maintaining speed (actually it's KEEPING the car moving), but it's not making it move FASTER. THIS is what I mean by load. You're not asking anything of the engine. "The demand for services or performance made on a machine or system." --Dictionary.com

You're not asking it to do anything more. Sure, there is a tiny bit of load on the engine to keep the car going, but very little because enertia isn't a factor. Sure, as drag increases, you would need more force to overcome it, but not more load. You would just be making the engine maintain a speed...not trying to get it to speed up. The load caused by you telling the engine to make the car accelerate is what increases the load enough to produce boost.

D...maintain 110 down the freeway in 4th gear in the turbo (trust me, it'll do it) and see if there's any boost being made. I'll bet you there won't be much, if any registering.

The irony of the situation is that the original poster most likely never figured out how to find the response to his post. Either that or he's lurking in the shadows, reading intently and biding his time...

In any event, at least he paved the way for some bi-partisan banter to break up the monotony.
Yeah. Next thing you know one of these RSX dudes is going to say that it can beat an old 300Z hands down! :iceslolan :iceslolan

Just kidding guys! :grinno: :grinno:

lol...an RSX-S probably could beat a Z31 (84-89) turbo, stock for stock. Goes to show you how technology helps.

But I'm willing to bet the Z31T is easier to mod successfully. No fancy computers, V-tec or high compression to work around. Z31T could be put into the mid/low 5s to 60 for less than 700 bucks.

Anyone have any success with V-tec controllers? Heard about them, but I've never heard anyone say anything about them. Worth while mod? V-tec is cool as hell!

lol...an RSX-S probably could beat a Z31 (84-89) turbo, stock for stock. Goes to show you how technology helps.

But I'm willing to bet the Z31T is easier to mod successfully. No fancy computers, V-tec or high compression to work around. Z31T could be put into the mid/low 5s to 60 for less than 700 bucks.

Anyone have any success with V-tec controllers? Heard about them, but I've never heard anyone say anything about them. Worth while mod? V-tec is cool as hell!
There's a company called Hondata that modifies your computer so that the VTEC crossover happens at a lower RPM. They also have an option that allows a laptop hookup via USB port to the computer. Here's the link if you want more details - http://hondata.com/kpro.html.

You can download the kmanager software for the kpro to your computer if you want to see what you can modify - http://hondata.com/downloads.html. I played with it a bit on the PC and the interface seems very simple to use. Once my warranty runs out, I'll probably get this mod.

Good shit, man. I've always liked Hondas. I used to have an 01 Prelude and I LOVED it. V-tec is cool as hell...I don't care what anyone says...I think it is a very valuable tool and I wish there was something like it I could do to my Z31.