they are softer than stock springs and coil bind. there are 4 coils sitting on top of each other in the rear at a stop.

 

is what i said really that hard to figure out? you are driving a fwd car. no matter what your suspension mods are, it's not going to be able to keep traction when going WOT under 100mph.

but that's only if you were able to even GET to 600fwhp supercharged, which likely won't happen anyway without a helluva shot of nitrous

i'm confused - in your first couple posts you said you wanted a street friendly car, now your list says you are building pretty much a track only car. either way, you're not going to get to 600fwhp on a 4 cylinder with a supercharger only

 

Sounds like you didn't have very good setup. ON the mustang they are pretty stiff. It really depends on how stiff the shock is set, a softer spring wouldn't dissapoint me though, she travels too little in some of corners I've really pressed her.

 

all i can say is good luck

 

what blaze is sayin that the eibach are subpar compared to stock, thats goin from Angelina Jolie to Olive Oyl

 

i love these kinda threads, they are priceless haha but more power to you if this ever happens

 

i'm not the smartest messy-can on the block, but it sounds like to me that you're trying to put a supercharger meant for a v8 onto a 4banger, and you assume this is possible b/c the car comes with A supercharger from factory?

uh....OP, by any chance did you notice that there's a slight difference between an 8 cylinder car and a FOUR cylinder car? I mean, my fourth grade teacher said I couldn't count past my fingers, but dayum, at least I knew my hemi from my v-tak...

 

Y not just go with a Lysholm 1.6L? I might know someone who has a extra 1.6L lol.

 

The shock determines rebound, not compression rates. That's what the springs are for. Fact: The sportlines don't handle as good as stock, and nowhere near pedders.

 

OEM ftw

 

click

 

I havn't decided the shock for sure, I havn't really even bothered to look around much, there are several options I suppose since it's gotten some negative reviews it should be something I take a look at.

The idea with the Supercharger being the W140AX is it would provide an extreme efficiency like a turbo, no lag, and meets volumetric airflow demands on it's high side. For a V-8 a 2.3 is a starter size supercharger, it's not altogether very uplifting on a V-8. Case and point most high powered Positive Displacement Supercharger cars run 2.8-3.2-3.4 sizes for that quad digit power, I highly doubt even with a refabricated intake manifold that would be wise to install. The 2.3 will be slightly under par for the 2.4L which will work out.

See there is only so much airflow each supercharger can flow, the 2.3 satisfies the power demand cfm I have targeted, and thus it's selection. How well it works out we shall see, I doubt it won't work to some degree, but I'm also about 40% sure it's ganna blow up the first motor on or by the third dyno, but if things hold together, and the mechainics I pay to seal up the engine do they're job it'll be fine.

IN FACT it'll be UNHOLY if everything reaches blueprint specs. It'll be a Import Destroyer on track, granted the strip will be less than ideal versus some of the modern turbo builds, my primary goal is to reach low track times.

 

I understand you wanting to "put on" for the LSJ's, I am a LSJ fan boy myself. I've got an SC with tons of **** including TVS. I am at 312 WHP and 273 TQ. If you really want to do the supercharger thing, have high HP, and kick LNF along with many others asses..... I would say zzp twin charge setup and that way you can have the best of both worlds. You can achieve high HP from the turbo and NO boost lag thanks to the supercharger.

 

I will explain this question and then the Guy who asked why not the 1.6L Twin screw.

The twin-charger groups are fine, I don't particularly have a problem with a Turbo on my LSJ, in fact if I was just going to get power I would not spend the effort on the supercharger at all. BUT, the hitch is, at the end of the day there is the trips around home and it's a grocery getter, the supercharger is low maintenance, predictable, will be streeted in snow, and does a great job of not overheating in the summer.

Also "detuning" a supercharger is EZ, pulley swap map two-three-etc... Now turbo, no matter how talented you are bouncing between race boost and street boost is unbelievably prone to error, even if I had an electronic boost controller, it would still fry in the summer in 100+F the only reason other than immediate and predictable performance I would say does the coffin to a turbo.

Now the 1.6L by Lysholm, no issues just not big enough for a 600fwhp build. In all actuality even if the statistics say this or that is a max, you may get as far as 80% before the "MAX" and find out you can't reach that far, why is simple it's perfect conditions versus actual conditions. The real condition meaning you have a motor which mechainically doesn't flow efficiently enough to process all the boost you may be able to generate, and heat is a vulnerability any boosted application suffers. The 2.3 should support the required CFM and maintain a effciency worth it's cost. Everything but the engine in this build will be built to 80% of max potential.

 

so are you going to do a custom bar/plate single pass setup on the intake mani to be able to flow and cool enough and port the crap out of the head?

 

uhhhh a turbo car is easier to drive in the snow because it takes load on the engine to spool it up. and if you have any boost controller that is giving you issues on a turbo motor, take that $20 ebay piece of **** and throw it in the garbage can, then buy a good one.

turbo is lower maintenance, when you want to change the boost you either press a button or turn a knob. supercharger you have to change the pulley

 

Is this guy serious?

 

You know, everyone bitches about people not spending big money to heavily modify a Cobalt and make a name for the community.

And then as soon as someone claims to be doing it everyone talks **** on him and tells him to not waste his time.

ZZP has a 900whp turbo cobalt, why is 600 on a blower so ridiculous?

Although, it would definitely take a whole lot to even get a supercharger that big moving without a super small pulley.

 

I think he's taking himself too seriously.

 

area made pretty good power on the tvs. I believe it was about 400 or pretty damn close. Was he ridiculous for attempting that? Maybe so, but at least he was realistic and at the end of the day, he proved it can happen.

Hell even an e85 m62 makes very respectable numbers. Btw, fyi, the lsj has its roots (no pun intended) deeply embedded in a turbocharged block from saab. Just putting that out there for all the fan boys.

I don't think anyone is shitting on this guy per say. I believe the method is a little half-baked. For one, is it even possible to fit that particular supercharger on this car? I don't know much about it myself, but what I do know is that it's made for v8 mustangs. I just think the OP needs to probably be a little more realistic and above all, do more research before I starts projecting his optimistic goals.

 

it's not the fact that anyone talks about doing it... it's the fact that everyone that says **** like this has no ******* idea what they are talking about.

if someone has the resources to accomplish it, they aren't going to come on this message board and ask other teenagers how to do it. they're going to start working on it in their shop and then pop up one day like zzp did and say "oh hey by the way, we just made 650whp with a blower on the cobalt"

 

^^^this,

I have no problem with someone coming into the community wiith a plan, putting said plan in a thread, and then people giving appropriate feedback. But this guy has no idea of the capabilities or the limitations of the lsj.

 

TWIN charged LSJ ftw

 

quadripley charged cobalt FTW!

 

you can stick a supercharger on anything you want they arent car specific