should i call atkins and supercharge my fd?if anyone has thought or if someone can help discuss this matter id aprreciate it. what would be the pros and cons?

 

cmon a little help?

 

Why? It is already Turbo (superior).

 

Most people who put a supercharger on get "used" to the horsepower. I put a Camden (now Atkins) on other vehicles and although they are the best of the bunch (roots blowers), I'd stick with the Turbo (agree with Directfreak)

 

For a while I was considering a doing a twincharger design. After talking to quite a few people they all said that you cannot supercharge a 13B without dialing up the idel. The 13B doesnt produce enough torque at idel to pull one. Then you will have heat problems. One suggestion was run a pigger pully to allow lower idel speeds. Is 2-3 psi worth the drag at top end. I dont think so In my opion. You might be abel to pull 5-6 but it is still minimal at the bottom end. I feel that a custom twin turbo setup wold be better than the super. such as the manifold being built in the other fourm.

 

they do it all the time codaxx with 13b fc's/
but the thing is a supercharger starts lagging out at probably 6000 no big deal i switch at 7000,and with a turbo charger i give up 4000 rpms for the t78 so all im really having fun on is 3000 rpm's.(4-7k)if i can get a blower to give me a solid 400-450 rwhp nailing the throttle instead of waiting for spoolup,sheez it sounds good to me.but siliken if they are awesome why would u stick with the turbo?and i dont know how it doesnt produce enough torque they are put on hondas all day

 

I wouldn't recommend it. If you're really driving hard then spool up is almost moot. You're going to lose some drivability. Your fuel economy will go down. My friend is in the process of putting an Atkins on his FB. I'll let you know how it turns out, but he's saying that he wants to put a Turbo engine etc. in his next car.
Don.

 

If you had a non turbo 2nd gen then maybe an SC would be a good idea.

 

dont supercharge. I hate superchargers. if a supercharger and a turbo charger were both putting in 15 psi into the same kind of engine, the turbo would make considerably more power, cause supers drain energy directly from the engine, turbo just makes backpressure.

 

Sin is right on that, Turbos use a wastegate too which makes them superior to a super. plus you can do anti-lag turbo like teams in the WRC use with the proper ECU. Turbo is certainly the choice.

 

Not to mention that rotaries (volumetrically speaking) produce a lot of exhaust gases relative to piston motors. That's one reason why the fd responds so well to turbocharging.

Generally speaking, superchargers are better suited to large displacement v8's.

No one that I know of has ever sc'ed an fd. There's a good reason for that...

 

where can i find this anti lag system

 

You can do anti-lag turbo systems with the proper ECU. the AEM EMS can do it if it ever comes out, and I believe the Apex i Power FC can with datalogit.

 

Everything has been mentioned on why not to use a supercharger on a small displacement engine. It doesnt produce enough torque. The parasitic drag of torque off the motor isnt worth the little extra power the supercharger makes. Thats why you see much better results from turbo's on small displacement engines like hondas and rotories.