Going Supercharged

[Hydro420Eclipse]

can u supercharge a 2003 Eclipse GT? not sure if a post simillar to this excist. if so point me to that direction. i want to fix my eclipse to the max, esp wen i got to keep up with a 2004 GTI 1.8T that will b getting a boost controller, a turbo timer, and some other mod.

[jfowler85]

yes. rippmods.com sells a supercharger set up for the rs/gs/gt. it is expensive as hell, however, and if you check out some of the bad cases of sds installation on behalf of RIPP at club3g.com, it doesn't seem worth it. i did come across a 3000gt sl with an eaton m90 setup...very impressive but i never could get a hold of the guy to find out what exactly he had to have done to run it...it appeared he had a totally, one-off custom fabricated intake manifold with the blower. *nice*. i am currently in the process of trying to figure out how to sc my gt also. dont forget though, you will obviously need better pistons, headers, bigger injectors, *maybe* a cam kit ($1100...!!), and a GTS or GTZ intake manifold with a throttle body spacer would help tremendously. your looking at about $2500 to $3000 in parts...and the eaton m90 is $2500-ish, i believe.

[Sleepr awd]

turbo is better... you dont' have to pull the engine when you install it

[Vtec95Civic]

Originally Posted by Elchicoloco86

turbo is better... you dont' have to pull the engine when you install it

Yes you do.. unless you want your engine to blow.

A turbo is still better, however.

[crazy_ugly_coyote]

I think he means you dont have to pull the engine if you only run low bost. 9 psi or less.

[drdisque]

Eaton M90's are only like $400 from a junkyard (they were OE on the 3800SC GM engines (GTP, Bonneville, Regal, etc)). That's why they're so attractive to use on custom jobs. What sucks about them is that they come with a really funky flange face that you have to make another end to in order to get the boost up to the throttle body or into the intake manifold.

[Sleepr awd]

Originally Posted by crazy_ugly_coyote

I think he means you dont have to pull the engine if you only run low bost. 9 psi or less.

that and i was pretty sure you didn't have to pull the engine out to install it either...but i may be wrong turbos ARE more efficient though, they reach max boost faster, and are a lot more easily upgradeable and if you keep it under the boost, you can keep your good mpg

16g turbos are only 400 brand new and dsmtraders should have lots for pretty cheap

[dickswhip00gs]

yep, when you get the funds, you ought to go turbo. Mitsu's and turbos go together like booze and a bachelor party. especially the 4-cyl. ive heard of and seen some atrocities regarding ripps "super charger" here in Fla. they have also had problems with consistancy- headers that dont line up correctly, parts that werent fully machined etc. either way, theres nothing that compares to the sound of that t3/t4 spoolin' up and the bov in action. it sends chills up my spine

[jfowler85]

Originally Posted by Elchicoloco86

turbo is better... you dont' have to pull the engine when you install it

more efficient based on what? s/c's dont need to spool, its all low end power. you could put the smack down on any turbo'd car, plus, assuming you buy everything new, you would spend within $500 either way for both setups including internals if you go big boost. i dont understand what the big fascination is with turbochargers among the 'street racing' scene...

[eclipsed4utoo]

its just a preference. some people are straight turbos and thats what they like. some people loves blowers and thats it. i believe that a turbo is better, but that has nothing to do with the street racing scene

[Sleepr awd]

Originally Posted by jfowler85

more efficient based on what? s/c's dont need to spool, its all low end power. you could put the smack down on any turbo'd car, plus, assuming you buy everything new, you would spend within $500 either way for both setups including internals if you go big boost. i dont understand what the big fascination is with turbochargers among the 'street racing' scene...

turbos are more efficient because you don't lose horsepower to gain horsepower, you only gain horsepower....s/c DO spool to make boost, we have V6's, mroe torque off the line means not much control w/ spin

turbos are easier in the street racing scene, sure there are domestics w/ s/c's but a lot of imports have turbos from the factory and are light enough to be extremely quick
i mean...shelby DID use turbo chargers for his dodge charger and omni setups in hte 80's the daytona iroc was turbo , eclipse, subaru WRX, evolution, supra, 300zx, mazda RX-7, various volvo's, saab's, VR-4 galant and 3kgt, and a majority of DIESEL engines for trucking companies are turbo and not s/c

[jfowler85]

Originally Posted by Elchicoloco86

turbos are more efficient because you don't lose horsepower to gain horsepower, you only gain horsepower....s/c DO spool to make boost, we have V6's, mroe torque off the line means not much control w/ spin

turbos are easier in the street racing scene, sure there are domestics w/ s/c's but a lot of imports have turbos from the factory and are light enough to be extremely quick
i mean...shelby DID use turbo chargers for his dodge charger and omni setups in hte 80's the daytona iroc was turbo , eclipse, subaru WRX, evolution, supra, 300zx, mazda RX-7, various volvo's, saab's, VR-4 galant and 3kgt, and a majority of DIESEL engines for trucking companies are turbo and not s/c

no...s/c's dont spool, i am referring to roots chargers which are belt driven, not spooled by engine exhaust (not centrifugal's, which dont spool either, they are basicaly belt driven turbos). also, there have been plenty of factory supercharged engines (GTP's, MR2's, Cobra's, Lightnings and Harley f-150's, any Kompressor mercedes, Jag XJR's, Range Rover's, Buick Regal's, Mini Cooper (s)'s even Toyota Previa minivans) so that doesn't mean anything. oh yes, and as far as the shelby's and iroc z's...horrid automotive atrocities...the product of new economic standards that should have never been created. my point is for about the same cost, you can yield the same power gains, but on a lower power band and rpm range which will get you up to speed faster than a turbo that gives you the same gains but a higher band/rpm range. i guess in the end it is all just preference, i myself am more of an american performance guy (having rebuilt a '69 Buick 350 for a trail jeep and a '66 Chevy 327 for a drag/street impala) as opposed to a import street racer. let me just end it with that, i really dont want to turn this into a s/c vs. turbo thread.

[Sleepr awd]

eh suit urself, ur gunna kick yourself though when changing boost could be as easy as the flip of a switch

[jfowler85]

Originally Posted by Elchicoloco86

eh suit urself, ur gunna kick yourself though when changing boost could be as easy as the flip of a switch

kick myself? ...no. why would i want to change the boost to the engine? if i went to the trouble of installing a forced induction system, i would have no need to back the hp and trq off any. are you referring to gas prices? why complain about something you cant control? spinning tires on wet roads? thats what i have a jeep for. going to the local track for some 1/4 mile racing? i dont need an e.t. to tell me how fast my car is. you take your little turbo'd car and i will walk all over you anytime, anywhere, on pavement or off road, in any weather and road condition with my roots s/c'd '69 jeep. hell...even before i overhauled the engine i could run circles around tsi awd talons, si's, and wrx's.

[dickswhip00gs]

I havent been here for awhile... i may have missed out on what you drive jfowler? "pimp your ride". both superchargers and turbos have been proven iron clad when set up correctly. im not gonna get into a piss match with you over which is better. for my application and the general consensus around the tuner market, turbo seems to be the way to go. especially with the four cyl.