centrifugal supercharged GT


paul b

GT Owner
Nov 2, 2006
810
Interesting post on Modular Ford forum, A centrifugal supercharger feeding the stock blower. A different twist on twin charging.
 

shelbyelite

PERMANENTLY BANNED
May 10, 2007
1
Interesting post on Modular Ford forum, A centrifugal supercharger feeding the stock blower. A different twist on twin charging.

Link? I gotta see this......
 

Empty Pockets

ex-GT Owner
Mark IV Lifetime
Le Mans 2010 Supporter
Oct 18, 2006
1,361
Washington State
Interesting post on Modular Ford forum, A centrifugal supercharger feeding the stock blower. A different twist on twin charging.


My immediate gut reaction is: WHY??? :bored

A roots or screw 'charger displaces the same volume of air (potentially) with every rotation...so there's no "lag" created anywhere by one of them. The centrifical, or axiel flow, 'chargers in essence NEED to "spool up" to provide boost (and they too create parasitic h.p. loss that turbos don't). Soooooo how is there any advantage to feeding a positive displacement blower with one that needs to "spool up"? Especially in the lower RPM ranges?

I know I'm not the sharpest crayon in the box, but, this duzzunt make enny sense to me...whut am I missing here?:willy (IOW, it would appear that the cent. blower would be "chasing" the boost already being provided by the roots or screw 'charger...and robbing add'tl HP while doing so. Whereas turbos feeding said blower as RPM's climb would be a win/win situation.)
 
Last edited:

Heffner Performance

*Supporting Vendor*
Supporting Vendor
Feb 22, 2006
367
Are you sure that they didn't just remove the internals from the stock supercharger and use it as an air box?
 

spddmnjay

GT Owner
Mark II Lifetime
Feb 14, 2008
422
Alberta, Canada
 

FlorIdaho Chris

Yeah, I've got one.
Mark IV Lifetime
Le Mans 2010 Supporter
Are you sure that they didn't just remove the internals from the stock supercharger and use it as an air box?

You called it Jason...
 

soroush

Ford Gt Owner
Mark II Lifetime
Aug 8, 2007
5,256
procharger(centrifugal) should require less power to turn vs. a positive displacement blower, there is small lag period, but nothing like a turbo, and it will make more hp on top vs the positive displacement blowers but not as much as a turbo, think of it as something between the whipple and a turbo set up, should be interesting to see how it performs, and btw that is not the stock sc, just the housing that has been modified to run the procharger via a shaft.
 

kumar

GT Owner
Jan 31, 2007
1,011
Dallas
I'm interested to see how a bunch of that stuff works out.

8500rpm
CNC heads
ZR1 brakes
the blower
 

Indy GT

Yea, I got one...too
Mark IV Lifetime
Jan 14, 2006
2,526
Greenwood, IN
This is the same guy who tried to hawk his new (Innovations West) harmonic balancer a while back. Just call me a nay sayer.....
Save your money.
 

B O N Y

MODERATOR & FGT OWNER
Mark IV Lifetime
Sep 5, 2005
12,110
Fresno, Ca.
YES! I recall him and the door we shoved him out of...
 

Empty Pockets

ex-GT Owner
Mark IV Lifetime
Le Mans 2010 Supporter
Oct 18, 2006
1,361
Washington State
:rofl:rofl:rofl
 

B.M.F.

GT Owner
Mark II Lifetime
Jan 29, 2009
1,785
Minnesota
Seems FORD must like the innovators west balencer cause they chose them out of any other manufacture out there for the New CJ Drag Pack mustang. As i have one so i should know. What is so bad with the innovators west anyways?

Just curious:cheers
 

kumar

GT Owner
Jan 31, 2007
1,011
Dallas
Seems FORD must like the innovators west balencer cause they chose them out of any other manufacture out there for the New CJ Drag Pack mustang. As i have one so i should know. What is so bad with the innovators west anyways?

Just curious:cheers

:pop
 

STORMCAT

GT
Mark IV Lifetime
Le Mans 2010 Supporter
May 25, 2006
7,551
Ft. Lauderdale
Seems FORD must like the innovators west balencer cause they chose them out of any other manufacture out there for the New CJ Drag Pack mustang. As i have one so i should know. What is so bad with the innovators west anyways?

Just curious:cheers

I think it was determined that the Ford GT balancer is not a typical balancer. It requires no maintenance and was designed specifically for this expensive power plant so there is no good reason to change it.
 

B.M.F.

GT Owner
Mark II Lifetime
Jan 29, 2009
1,785
Minnesota
I think it was determined that the Ford GT balancer is not a typical balancer. It requires no maintenance and was designed specifically for this expensive power plant so there is no good reason to change it.

Actaully untill 08 the only difference between the 07 Gt500 balencer and the 05-6 Gt balencer was .100 inbetween the 10rib and the 6 rib. There was a discussion about it on svt performance. They look 100% identical in person untill you get the caliper out. The early gt500 test motors had GT balencers and a simple .100 change was made due to fitment of power steering pump on the Gt500.
 

STORMCAT

GT
Mark IV Lifetime
Le Mans 2010 Supporter
May 25, 2006
7,551
Ft. Lauderdale
Actaully untill 08 the only difference between the 07 Gt500 balencer and the 05-6 Gt balencer was .100 inbetween the 10rib and the 6 rib. There was a discussion about it on svt performance. They look 100% identical in person untill you get the caliper out. The early gt500 test motors had GT balencers and a simple .100 change was made due to fitment of power steering pump on the Gt500.

Any dimensional / weight changes effect the balancer. Not here to start a debate. Why would you want to risk changing it on the GT? Not an easy part to remove or maintain so it makes no sense to mess with it.. I am not saying the other balancer is not good or bad. That subject was discussed here before.. You may want to find the old post. .. move on to the thread topic,,:biggrin
 
Last edited:

B.M.F.

GT Owner
Mark II Lifetime
Jan 29, 2009
1,785
Minnesota
Any dimensional / weight changes effect the balancer. Not here to start a debate. Why would you want to risk changing it on the GT? Not an easy part to remove or maintain so it makes no sense to mess with it.. I am not saying the other balancer is not good or bad. That subject was discussed here before.. You may want to mind the old post. .. move on to the thread topic,,:biggrin

I agree only maybe 2% of the population would benifit from this or want todo this. Just interesting that FORD Chose this balencer over all the other brands tested:) Guess they must not be that bad.

Also Congrats to Accufab as they were the sole provider for the Throttle bodies/maf housings.:cheers
 

gtinmyblood

GT Owner
Mark IV Lifetime
Le Mans 2010 Supporter
Feb 23, 2007
735
Mesa Az/Aspen Co
I have a ProCharger D1R on my 94 mustang.The engine is seriously built and puts out 850HP at the rear wheels. Goes like stink! Problem is that I've had to rebuild the ProCharger about every thousand miles I use it. It's great for a run down the track if you plan to tear the engine down every two or three runs and rebuild the ProCharger along with it but for street use it's lousy.
 

B O N Y

MODERATOR & FGT OWNER
Mark IV Lifetime
Sep 5, 2005
12,110
Fresno, Ca.
Nathan,
Do you have a clue how many Ford GT motors have been blown up by backyard experts with a laptop? You really don't want to know.
There is always more horsepower, but the risk increases
exponentially
.
Cheers,
daniel
 

B.M.F.

GT Owner
Mark II Lifetime
Jan 29, 2009
1,785
Minnesota
I have a ProCharger D1R on my 94 mustang.The engine is seriously built and puts out 850HP at the rear wheels. Goes like stink! Problem is that I've had to rebuild the ProCharger about every thousand miles I use it. It's great for a run down the track if you plan to tear the engine down every two or three runs and rebuild the ProCharger along with it but for street use it's lousy.

That is awesome, but the D1r is OLD SCHOOL and one of thier first race blowers and they don't even make that blower anymore as it was a early oil fed blower. Put a Newer f1r on it and it will make a 1000rwhp. Their reliability is alot better these days. I have a Vortech ysi on my Saleen and it makes 895rwhp on E85. 18 lbs of boost.