Ryuu600

First off, parasitic loss has nothing to do with CFM per psi of boost. You get parasitic loss from any accessory on your drive belt. Parasitic loss is how much HP you lose while spinning said accessory.

What I said in an authoritative tone was not that the TC CF SC had more parasitic loss than the SS/SC Roots. As a mattter of fact I said that I would need to see numbers to make an educated call on that, but IMO yes. What I said was that the TC design made for more parasitic loss than a standard, meaning no driveshaft, CF mounting design.

On the track with lot's of time and money to find the right combination of exhaust manifold size, turbine size, compression, and overall tuning, yes the turbo is better, but the roots is easier to setup and tune making it much better for a daily driver.

chevysalesman614

i smoked one not too long ago.. i think it's 200 hp.. but your guy may have had other mods

8cd03gro

actually parasitic loss does have quite a bit to do with flow. The faster you have to spin the blower to flow x amount, the more power you are using to spin it. So a more efficient blower (cfm wise) will rob less power. If this wasn't true people would just use smaller blowers with more efficient cooling setups instead of larger, more efficient blowers. i'm pretty drugged up on vicodin right now (i just had reconstructive surgery on my nose) so im kinda having a hard time keeping my train of thought on this, but i can better explain later what i am trying to say if you want me to, but im sure somebody else here can elaborate for now.

and a proper centrifugal setup will still outperform a roots setup on the track. roots is easy, like you said, and it is very reliable, but it is pretty much the worst choice for a track performer because of its ineficiencies (holy **** i cant spell right now) and the difficulty of having a good intercooler setup. Roots has the least potential of all the forced induction setups really.

Red2.4SS/SC

you have yourself a contradicting post which one is it

Witt

comma in the wrong place, they are comparable to a stock SS/SC, but a tC with a pulley swap is good for 300whp.

Ryuu600

You are confusing efficency of the setup in creating power with parasitic loss. Parasitic loss is the loss of HP caused by spinning any accessory from the crank. Alternator, power steering pump, cooling fan, and SC. So by definition, parasitic loss has nothing to do with CFM. Yes it is true that the faster you spin the SC the more parasitic loss and the faster you spin it the more CFM, however, CFM has nothing to do with parasitic loss. If it did then no SC would be effecient. The ability of a SC to create CFM at low boost pressures, resulting lower rotor speeds and parasitic loss, is it's efficiency. Parasitic loss is a byproduct of spinning the SC off the crank. CFM and parasitic loss have no direct relationship.

8cd03gro

no...ok listen here is my point. their setup is inherently more efficient. and from what i have seen of the kit and its specs flows quite a bit better than the roots (i beleive u guys use the m62? correct?) which means it has to spin quite a bit less to flow the same amount. You are right the small driveshaft on their centri setup will add a bit of parasitic loss, but you are also forgetting that they at say 12 psi (stock) on your setup you are flowing X cfm, while they are pushing that same cfm on say 10 psi. Their blower is spinning much faster to do this inherently because it is a centrifugal system, but because a centri uses a gear box the actual pulley is likely spinning slower and drawing less power to create the same amount of air flow which creates less parasitic loss, so the driveshaft likely does not change the fact that their setup still at the SAME CFM has less parasitic loss, and if you aren't comparing the two setups at the same amount of flow there is no point in comparing them at all because parasitic loss is directly proportional to how fast you spin the blower.

Ryuu600

I agree with everything you just said. Their setup, which I have never argued with, is more efficient. I was merely pointing out that regardless of the efficiency of the blower they might have more parasitic loss, although greating more hp in the end.

AKA. say we have 30hp parasitic loss at * CFM and create 70hp. 70-30= 40hp gain.

They have 40hp parasitic loss at *CFM and create 100hp 100-40= 60hp gain.

Their setup can create more gains but still suffer more parasitic loss.

I don't know this for sure ofcourse because I have no numbers to reference but it is my theory on their setup.

jekqmb

All i can say is their slow, and they can not handle over 300whp without cracking open their motors too......Ive seen a few vids of them going down when their over 300whp. Also the ZPI turbo for an auto is junk, a guy here only ran a 14.8@92!!! I mean who spends that kind of money to run a 14.8 at only 92mph!!!!!!??? Their really a joke, they have a camry motor and weigh a ton without having any power to back that weight up, you dont race camrys and you shouldnt race TC's, those motors are made to not be pushed. The only thing they have going for them is looks.

D4u2s0t

you guys that bash anything that's not a balt are funny as hell...

Ryuu600

^^ Agreed. The TC can be a fast car, it will cost to get it there, but it can be a fast car. Let's not forget people that even for the money our cars are not the fastest stock.. as a matter of fact based on 1/4 and 0-60 times we are #8 on the list of cars costing between $20K and $25k...

Oh and the Camry V6 is #2 on that list.

D4u2s0t

so a turbo that adds over 240 whp give or take a few is a shitty setup? is that what your'e saying?

Ryuu600

I think he is saying what alot of our members do, dyno numbers are great but if your performance at the track doesn't back it up they are worthless. The TC is heavier, has a softer suspension, no LSD, and is geared for cruising. This all combines to make it slower in the 1/4 mile as compared to a similar HP/TQ Cobalt.

I have to say though that anything that can add almost 100whp is hardly a shitty setup.

D4u2s0t

they're the same weight as the cobalt...i've heard of ONE person on here running 12's, and that was a 12.9... if we took cobaltss.nets 10 fastest cars vs. the 10 fastest cars on the scion site, we'd get crushed.

jekqmb

Ya considering its a V6...We drive 2.0's, dont forget that

Ryuu600

They are actually about 100lbs heavier in stock trim than an SS/SC. And agian I say... They can be fast, you WILL spend more to make them fast, but they can be fast. Maybe their "top 10" can beat our "top 10" But they will also have spent more getting there. Plus they have alot more aftermarket T/C and S/C options that we do and alot more people running them. My point all along has been that if you spend dollar for dollar on a Cobalt and an TC the Cobalt will probably be faster.

jekqmb

I would really like to see that at the track...Those TC's that run those times are set up as race cars, big ass turbos etc....Are cars have the crappy factory eaton, on the street are cars walk all over any of them, dont forget those are aftermarket turbo kits that are put on those cars...Not factory. The 2.0 LSJ owns the TC motor in every which way. The guy here with the ZPI kit only put down alittle over 200whp, yay lets spend 3 grand for junk. I would love to see a 350whp TC beat a 320whp cobalt ss/sc from a dig at the track.....The cobalt is a way better performer. We can argue all day about the TC but in reality even with aftermarket setups it cant compete cause its not made too.

D4u2s0t

so what? dollar for dollar i can take a $500 civic and make it faster than a ss/sc... so that makes it better??? dollar for dollar is a stupid argument... you drive what you drive, and whatever it cost to get there is what it cost... do you think the pro racers get pissed because someone had a bigger engine than they did?

some would say the same about the cobalt... it's not the be all end all of cars... i i had the choice of a 350 whp scion vs. a 320whp cobalt, i'd take the scion... even if it is a little slower, it's still an all around nicer car.

jekqmb

I would rather have a damn neon over a TC...everyone makes fun of those cars for just being so gay from the factory. Whoo hoo lets get neons under are seats for an extra $500 dollars!!!!!!

8cd03gro

who has made 320whp on pump gas without blowing a piston? I haven't seen it. Some of you guys need to realize that, yes your cars mod very well TO A POINT, but you have pretty weak pistons and once you get to the point of having to get some forged pistons and work on other internal components, your costs go up exponentially and at that point the eaton will become so innefficient that you too will likely have to go with aftermarket f/i, so your cost total to run 12's reliably, if their motor is as strong as has been said (im not sure so dont think i am saying it is) will be less than yours. Some people here just talk trash until the cows come home when they know and everyone else knows they are wrong. You aren't necessarily doing that now, but that is what this is turning into, and not to **** anyone off, but really the lsj has some shitty ass pistons stock which really limit it in the aftermarket scene which is why there are alot of cars that are slower stock that are gonna have much faster "top tens" than you guys are. Hell over in the 4.0 community our top ten would demolish you guys, but then our average is mid-high 14's so it isn't really how the performance of the car should be based. I think this is a stupid argument and it should be left at the tc has potential if done right.

Ryuu600

You are right a cheap old beater would be faster if you poured the money into it, I was talking about 2 new off the lot vehicles and 2 specific vehicles at that.

Oh and the TC is a nicer car in your opinion. I personally didn't like it at all when I test drove one. I may have strange taste in cars but I love the interior of my SS/SC and think the exterior is better looking by far. Again though this is all my opinion. As someone said previously, neither car has been around long enough to really say which is better made in the long run.

Again, I am not say the TC is not a nice car and the Cobalt rules all. I am just stating that I think the Cobalt is nicer than the TC but there are better cars out that than either.

M-Dub

I almost bought a TRD S/C'd TC... AND IT WAS SLLLLLLOOOOOOOOWWWWWW! And they handle like ****... and they ViIIIIBBBRRRRrrrraAAAAttttttTTTTEEEeeee like something mad!

jekqmb

Hmmm well its not our actual pistons, its our piston rings that are junk, and i dont think we'll be seeing a 1000+hp race TC for a long ass time if ever. The ecotec is one hell of a motor besides the crappy piston rings.

ghost

Buddy of mine has one, low to flat 15's stock. But add in some minor trd mods or better and the boost jumps on those cars. Still nothin impressive.

8cd03gro

you mean the ring landings? more than a few people have broken their pistons here. hypereutectic pistons are not very strong. it takes alot more than just a change of pistons to get to those 1khp drag ecotecs. you seem to be under the same illusion some people are here. tons of engines can make 1,000 hp with an entirely different rotating assembly....don't base what you are going to be able to do with a stock engine on what factory sponsored race teams can do with a fully forged race prepped engine.

hell my motor has forged rods, a closed deck iron block, and a damn strong crank, with hypereutectic pistons. There are a couple 500rwhp+ 4.0's running around on the stock block/tranny but the our ring landings are way too shallow from the top of the piston. That might be the same thing you guys have, but that doesn't mean it is some amazing ******* engine. im sick of people here thinking that the insane gm sponsored drag ecotecs are even close to stock ecotecs. THEY ARE NOT. Good motor for sure, but don't use that as justification that it is a good motor. with the major internal work done on those drag ecotoecs you could make a damn mini cooper engine make 700whp so it must be one of the best engines in the world eh?! the ecotec is a great engine for sure, but PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE stop using these totally race prepped ecotec drag cars as justification for that statement.


i bet this has 1k+hp
http://www.yoursciontc.com/information/drag_tc.html


please actually take a look at the gm build book for the ecotecs and realize how much money/work it takes to get an ecotec up to those power levels.