• Mustang Forums
  • 1996 - 2004 SN95 Mustang -General/Talk-
  • SN95 4.6L Mustang Tech

Centrifugal vs. Roots

  • Thread starter Thread starter stang2001GT
  • Start date Start date May 30, 2004
S

stang2001GT

Founding Member
Dec 30, 2000
690
0
0
Haverstraw, NY
May 30, 2004
#1
  • May 30, 2004
  • #1
I know, I know, this has probably been spoken about on here 1000 times, but why not again. What are the benefits of each? HP gain? Anything and everything. I hope to get 1 soon, and would like to know everything.

Thanks in advance for everything.
 

Cammed90Notch

New Member
Mar 26, 2003
592
0
0
Greenville, SC
May 30, 2004
#2
  • May 30, 2004
  • #2
Want the "pros" of each, while being more efficient?

Then here you go

For all of you that have been waiting for this, attached is the dyno sheet that was done last Tuesday on a bone-stock 2000 GT using the HP Performance Stage I Twinturbo Kit (46mm turbos). The car made 463 rwhp and 555 rwtq @ 8 lbs. boost. Customer drove it home (about 300 miles) on Wednesday and reported the following:

"The car ran good on the way home. I did " air it out" several times on second and high gear. I ran it for 9 or 10 miles at about 110 mph and it stayed cool and drove nice. The car feels really strong launching at about 2000. Anything over that just spins until you back out of it. Thanks for your efforts."

We will be doing a dyno test on a similar car with 54mm turbos soon and will post the results.
Click to expand...
http://www.turbomustangs.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=14178&highlight=turbo+X2C

Yes, a twin turbo kit for your GT
 

smokin'Red35th

Member
Jan 9, 2004
493
0
16
Las Vegas, NV
May 30, 2004
#3
  • May 30, 2004
  • #3
From what i have read, the Kenne bell twin screw gives you the best of both worlds when looking at the roots and a centrifugal. the twin screw runs cooler and more efficiently with less paracitic loss from the belt drive. If you want to know more about the twin screw (which i know wasnt part of your question, but should be considered IMO) check out their website. www.kennebell.net After reading thier abundance of information, I am more than sold on their supercharger. I WILL have on in then next year or so.
 
W

WOT

Founding Member
Nov 26, 2000
2,817
0
46
Regina, Canada
May 31, 2004
#4
  • May 31, 2004
  • #4
After seeing all the guys running the Kenne Bell and seeing thier numbers. I kind of wish I waited 2 months. Buy with that said my Novi kicks ass. The car is like stock untill 3000 RPM, then all hell is unleashed.

It is nice, I like it. I can't wait until I can do the heads and cams.
 

drexebo

New Member
Mar 3, 2004
99
0
0
May 31, 2004
#5
  • May 31, 2004
  • #5
that torque and power curve of the twin turbo stang look like ass!... I'm not sure what a madly dropping power curve from 4500 rpms down would do in terms of performance, but i'd much rather make 380 ft/lbs of torque from 2000 to 6000 rpms than peak in an rpm range that i'd never be using to race. Is that curve the nature of most turbo cars? I thought imports and what not peaked in high rpms w/ turbos?

either way, at 8psi i'm sure that turbos would still kick the ass of an equally boosted supercharged gt...
 

smokin'Red35th

Member
Jan 9, 2004
493
0
16
Las Vegas, NV
May 31, 2004
#6
  • May 31, 2004
  • #6
drexebo said:
that torque and power curve of the twin turbo stang look like ass!... I'm not sure what a madly dropping power curve from 4500 rpms down would do in terms of performance, but i'd much rather make 380 ft/lbs of torque from 2000 to 6000 rpms than peak in an rpm range that i'd never be using to race. Is that curve the nature of most turbo cars? I thought imports and what not peaked in high rpms w/ turbos?

either way, at 8psi i'm sure that turbos would still kick the ass of an equally boosted supercharged gt...
Click to expand...

Maybe they fed the graph paper backwards when they printed it
 

Cammed90Notch

New Member
Mar 26, 2003
592
0
0
Greenville, SC
May 31, 2004
#7
  • May 31, 2004
  • #7
that is quite unusual, maybe it wasn't tuned all the way

I've seen tons of V8+turbos have a torque curve as flat as the salt lake flats
 
C

CuddaWuddaShuda

Founding Member
Mar 5, 2002
678
0
0
May 31, 2004
#8
  • May 31, 2004
  • #8
To me, this question equates to the question of torque-vs.-power. And I would always build for power, not for torque. You will find people who say things like "torque actually moves the car, not power" but I am not sure what that means. So I suppose I favor the centrifugal blower. The twin-screw is a slick product, though, and it's fundamentally more similar to the Roots blower.
 

xQuickSilverx

New Member
Apr 25, 2004
5
0
0
Greensboro NC
May 31, 2004
#9
  • May 31, 2004
  • #9
torque gets your moving(off the line & acceleration), horsepower keeps you going (top end)
 

Dan_Soprano

15 Year Member
May 7, 2003
7,410
53
129
Jacksonville, FL
May 31, 2004
#10
  • May 31, 2004
  • #10
I have the 9psi ic KB on my car and absolutetly love it. It is all about personal pref though. Nothing like making over 400 rwtq at 1000 rpm!!!
 
S

stang2001GT

Founding Member
Dec 30, 2000
690
0
0
Haverstraw, NY
May 31, 2004
#11
  • May 31, 2004
  • #11
I think I am leaning towards the Kenne Bell. However I would like more information. What is the website for the turbo kit?
 

SonicB

Founding Member
Apr 29, 2002
239
0
0
May 31, 2004
#12
  • May 31, 2004
  • #12
take the average american and put them in a car with lots of low end torque and they will like it more than a car with top end hp. so despite the reliability and nearly maintenance free aspects of vortech's auto makers install pd blowers instead because they know what americans like and what sells.

then there are turbos but whats a different conversation.
 

mogs01gt

Founding Member
Jul 22, 2002
3,113
30
119
Ohio
May 31, 2004
#13
  • May 31, 2004
  • #13
The dyno sheet of that TT setup looks like complete ass. Looks like it took forever to spool, which is odd, and it lost power. You only loose power with turbo kits if you are loosing boost.
 

Cammed90Notch

New Member
Mar 26, 2003
592
0
0
Greenville, SC
May 31, 2004
#14
  • May 31, 2004
  • #14
http://www.turbochargedpower.com/

Here's just one of the many dealers,

and here's a place for tons, tons, and more tons of info

www.turbomustangs.com/
 

Cammed90Notch

New Member
Mar 26, 2003
592
0
0
Greenville, SC
May 31, 2004
#15
  • May 31, 2004
  • #15
here's from a stock 302 w/ trickflow heads and intake,


 

DBMSTNG

I fantasize about it being BIG!
Founding Member
Apr 23, 2002
2,120
0
56
not quite here
May 31, 2004
#16
  • May 31, 2004
  • #16
drexebo said:
that torque and power curve of the twin turbo stang look like ass!... I'm not sure what a madly dropping power curve from 4500 rpms down would do in terms of performance, but i'd much rather make 380 ft/lbs of torque from 2000 to 6000 rpms than peak in an rpm range that i'd never be using to race. Is that curve the nature of most turbo cars? I thought imports and what not peaked in high rpms w/ turbos?

either way, at 8psi i'm sure that turbos would still kick the ass of an equally boosted supercharged gt...
Click to expand...


it looks as though they didn't go WOT while on the dyno untill after 3600rpm. with two small turbos, it should have had near full boost if not full boost by then.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

P
rear Impact absorbers.
  • Praetorious
  • May 4, 2026
  • 1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk-
Replies
2
Views
132
1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk- May 5, 2026
Praetorious
P
P
Air Fuel ratio bung location.
  • Praetorious
  • Feb 7, 2026
  • 1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk-
  • 2
Replies
39
Views
902
1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk- Feb 11, 2026
Noobz347
B
'03 GT Fuel Pump/Pressure/Delivery Issue
  • Brodach
  • Oct 21, 2025
  • SN95 4.6L Mustang Tech
Replies
8
Views
855
SN95 4.6L Mustang Tech Oct 31, 2025
gkomo
C
Need 1973 Mustang schematic
  • Cudajim
  • Sep 28, 2025
  • 1965 - 1973 Classic Mustangs -General/Talk-
Replies
18
Views
499
1965 - 1973 Classic Mustangs -General/Talk- Oct 10, 2025
manicmechanic007
F
5 lug disc brake pad help
  • Foxrider714
  • Nov 14, 2025
  • 1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk-
Replies
3
Views
229
1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk- Nov 17, 2025
KRUISR
Share:
Bluesky Email Share Link
  • Mustang Forums
  • 1996 - 2004 SN95 Mustang -General/Talk-
  • SN95 4.6L Mustang Tech
Menu
Log in

Register

  • Forums
  • What's new
  • Media
  • Resources
  • Contact
  • Sponsor
X

Privacy & Transparency

We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:

  • Personalized ads and content
  • Content measurement and audience insights

Do you accept cookies and these technologies?

X

Privacy & Transparency

We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:

  • Personalized ads and content
  • Content measurement and audience insights

Do you accept cookies and these technologies?