1994 Gt 302 5.0

[Boros24]

Supercharger or Turbo? which will give me the best overall results? all basic mods so far - exhaust, intake, ect...

thanks in advance for the advice

Rob

[Rio94gt]

Turbo is prob the best way to go but is going to be more pricy than a supercharger. The supercharger kits are pretty basic to install on your car and are pretty efficient for the price. You can check my setup in my sig. There is a guy on here (Killercanary) that will be turbo soon so you can see what he says.

[Mater]

Turbo :D !!!!

[Killercanary]

Rob, what kind of power are you looking for? How mechanically inclined are you? Is the car a daily driver, weekend cruiser, track monster, etc? It'll help to know the answer to these questions first before making a recommendation, but generally speaking a turbo will make more power and have broader area under the curve than a centrifical type of super charger like a vortech/paxton/pro charger.

[yeahloh95]

i have had good luck with my vortech kit. the car makes good power, with hci and the blower and runs 11.3's on killers et streets:D

[shawnsvtcobra]

Turbo.....

[Boros24]

I drive the car a lot but thats only cause I like it more than the other whip. I have had it for about 5 months now, dont know to much about mustangs in general but I would like to get some serious power out of her (400 rwhp range). Price isnt my big concern, Im more woried about dependability. My thinking is that if I can get enough power out of it then I wont have to run it so hard when I hit the track. I dont want to turn it into a drag only car and most of all I dont want to look like a fool when racing. All of the work will be done by people who know what they are doing so this isnt going to be a half ass project. I just want to make sure that Im happy with what I buy and get the results Im looking for... Comfortable to drive whenever, low 12's on the track...

A lot of you have recomended Turbo, any suggestions?

[Viper_ed]

Another vote for the turbo! Try here:

http://www.hellionpowersystems.com/

[Boros24]

Another vote for the turbo! Try here:

http://www.hellionpowersystems.com/



thanks viper, but there isnt anything on that page for my car. they have 87-93 and 96+ but i didnt see anything at all for my 94.

any other suggestions would be appreciated

[Viper_ed]

thanks viper, but there isnt anything on that page for my car. they have 87-93 and 96+ but i didnt see anything at all for my 94.

any other suggestions would be appreciated

Call and talk to John Urist. He may be able to get you the setup you need.

[Boros24]

thanks again Viper!!

[Rodeheaver's]

let me tell you from experience, you had better know a little about mechanics if you plan on running a turbo! In my opinion, street cars that are turbo always need a little tweeking now and then, tighten this and fix that, do you know what i mean?

[Killercanary]

I drive the car a lot but that's only cause I like it more than the other whip. I have had it for about 5 months now, don't know to much about mustangs in general but I would like to get some serious power out of her (400 rwhp range). Price isn't my big concern, I'm more worried about dependability....
Comfortable to drive whenever, low 12's on the track...

A lot of you have recommended Turbo, any suggestions?

If you drive it a lot, I may steer towards a SC over a turbo. That's not to say that a turbo can't be a street friendly power adder, but IMO the supercharger is going to have a slight edge here.

For 400rwhp, either a turbo of a SC will do the trick, the turbo will just be a lot easier to do it with. Do you want to retain the stock heads, cam, etc? If so, the turbo will make more power, but in both situations you may run into valve float problems. Both the SC and turbo will have positive pressure air behind the intake valve trying to force it open when its closed. At high rpms this can lead to the valve "floating" and staying open when it shouldn't. This can be a fairly common problem with stock head/valve spring cars with some miles on them. A turbo till also do the same to the exhaust valve though. This is due to the back pressure created in the exhaust tubing between the head and the turbine wheel of the turbo. This isn't a big enough problem to steer clear of one versus the other, but its something to think about.

400rwhp can be had with either power adder with the stock heads and cam, but it'll take more boost and more bolt-ons to do it with a SC over a turbo since the SC acts a parasitic power loss since it uses a belt to drive it. The turbo uses the spent exhaust gases, and although it isn't "free" HP with no loss (it also cost power to run a turbo due to back pressure) it does require less power to make boost than the SC.

A SC'd car with an intake (something like an edelbrock performer), throttle body, larger mass air meter, larger injectors and fuel pump, full exhaust (headers, H/X pipe, and cat back), and around 10lbs of boost should be very close to 400rwhp when properly dyno tuned.

A turbo'd car with just fuel upgrades and 12lbs of boost would be darn close to 400rwhp if not above it, it will also make more power "under the curve" which is more important than "peak" power. Since SC'd make boost with RPM (the more rpm's you are running, the faster the SC's impeller is turning and thus the more boost that is being made), they tend to be "peaky" and make power in a linear fashion in relation to rpm. Turbo's however don't rely on rpm's like the SC'd do, so they can be at full boost by say 2500 and therefore they will make a lot more power from 3000-5000 on average than a SC will. I am of coarse referring to centrifugal SC's and not roots/screw types like the Kenne Bell.


If you want to just run low 12's you don't need 400rwhp. :thmbsup:

[Killercanary]

BTW- I'm going to running a http://www.proturbokits.com setup on my next setup. If you call them ask to speak with Dalton, he's very helpful and can answer a lot of your questions.