Does anyone here have or know of anyone that has put a roots type supercharger on a 2.0L? I've used the search and found a bunch of talk about people wanting one but no actual projects. I just purchased an Eaton M62 to put on mine and am going to fabricate everything if I need to but it would help get this thing running if anyone can offer advice on pulleys, belts, brackets etc. I've talked to Thomas Knight and seen lots of posts about the shoddy quality work he does here and on other boards so that's out. Anyone else out there done this? If I get this thing up and running well and dyno it is anyone interested if I decide to produce a kit?
Supercharger (roots type)
- Thread starter Traveler
- Start date
Why easier? Making a turbo manifold and all the inlet plumbing is more complex than just making an intake and a drive system. Besides, it's easier to tune a supercharger. I'm trying to have this done by the end of the summer. I'm going to make a shorty header first, then start fabricating the blower stuff. Hope to have the header done and dynoed by July 1 or so.
BlueMP5Racer
Member
Hey I would be very interested in a SC.
I beg to differ. The only hard part of fabricating a turbo system is the manifold. The intake plumbing is easy, I can do it in a half a day. The manifolds are readily available. Spoolin_mp3 makes them, a guy from the northeast area makes them now, and turbonetics makes a manifold. Also you can probably talk tripoint into selling you just a manifold, not to mention BEGI also. Oh, and M2 is making a kit so you might be able to get a manifold from them. I recomend Spoolin's mani though because of it being tubular, much faster spool up. So I'd have to say that turbo is by far easier than a supercharger. A super charger will not yield as much power on this 4 banger as a turbo will.
Last edited:
It might not yield the highest peak numbers, but the average numbers and the driveability are outstanding. I've talked to some guys on the Probe forums that have done this on the 2.0L Probe motors and had 180 lb/ft of torque at 2200 rpm and the curve stays flat all the way to redline with a peak torque of just shy of 190. It doesn't suffer from the torque fall off that our engines do now after 5000. I'm hoping to see 175-180 HP at the wheels when I'm done running 7 psi. Time will tell and I will be dynoing it when it's finished. I'm a hot rodder from way back and I love instant throttle response and torque.
I can't drop a big block Chrysler into this thing so I'm going to see what the 4 banger will do. If I'm not happy with the results, I'll just drop a V-6 in and play with it. There's enough room for a 2.5 in there easy. Lot's of parts already available for those.
I can't drop a big block Chrysler into this thing so I'm going to see what the 4 banger will do. If I'm not happy with the results, I'll just drop a V-6 in and play with it. There's enough room for a 2.5 in there easy. Lot's of parts already available for those.
I will give a supercharger the credit for instant torque. But I think it will cost more to do a SC setup than a turbo. Some of the initial power is lost on the pulley also. But if it's a linear power curve you are looking for, SC is the right way to go. It would make a killer AutoX car!
The latest Sport Compact magazine had an interesting article on picking turbos for different applications. Of note to myself at least were ones such as a T25(I believe that's the type) that has a very low RPM kick in of around 1500 - 2500..and it's hitting it's high around 3500....that'd be a great application for autoX...and you can still have a pretty high boost setting of up to like 16 PSI...I'd be happy with that. 
Here is a way you can look at it. Superchargers give huge amounts of power to large displacement motors. If they didn't, you would see lots of turbo top fuel motors with John Force driving them. But you don't. But when it comes to drag racing 4 bangers, you mostly see turbocharged drag cars. This is because the 4 cyl doesn't have any torque to spare for the pulley like the V8 does. But then you can ask yourself, what RPM's is the car at during autox's. The only time it's below 4000 is during the start. I don't know about you, but when I come out of a corner, I'm at like 5000 to 6000 RPM. My turbo is going to give me full boost at around 2800 rpm. And the boost isn't zero below that. Half boost is probably going to be around 1200 to 1500 rpm. So the boost is gradually rising from 1 to 2800rpm. This is why I think a turbo is better. But, a supercharger will give you a more constant power curve than a turbo will. As for the reliabilty, I don't see a difference as long as you maintain your system.
Didn't mean for this to turn into a war between the supercharger and the turbo! I've just decided to build an SC Protege and wondered if anyone else had done it or knew anyone that had!
As far as reliability goes, the Eaton SC will beat anything out there. Why do you think Mercedes, Ford, GM and others use it as OEM? The thing is totally self contained and runs for a LONG time with NO maintenance. The M62 Eatons regularly go over 200,000 miles.
You'd see more top fueler turbos out there if the NHRA hadn't factored them out of existence. The reason you don't see them is because they were effectively banned from competition by imposing large weight penalties on the cars that had them. The reason? They are quieter and don't make as much of a spectacle as the supercharged nitro burners. They don't throw huge flames out of 2 foot head pipes, they don't have the HUGE sound of supercharged fuelers and they are faster than supercharged cars. Face it, turbos kick ass at high horsepower.
I'm just trying to build a very streetable 205-210 HP 2.0L that will return decent fuel economy and be a total blast to drive. Road and Track and others have all said these cars would kick ass with 200 HP, so I'm setting out to build a dead reliable one.
I'm also building a header for the cars this next week. I've got the parts together finally and will be done by next weekend. Then it goes on the dyno again to see what was gained. Should have the results by a week from next Tuesday. This header would work on all the 2.0L's so if anyone's interested drop me a line. I'll post the results as soon as I get them.
As far as reliability goes, the Eaton SC will beat anything out there. Why do you think Mercedes, Ford, GM and others use it as OEM? The thing is totally self contained and runs for a LONG time with NO maintenance. The M62 Eatons regularly go over 200,000 miles.
You'd see more top fueler turbos out there if the NHRA hadn't factored them out of existence. The reason you don't see them is because they were effectively banned from competition by imposing large weight penalties on the cars that had them. The reason? They are quieter and don't make as much of a spectacle as the supercharged nitro burners. They don't throw huge flames out of 2 foot head pipes, they don't have the HUGE sound of supercharged fuelers and they are faster than supercharged cars. Face it, turbos kick ass at high horsepower.
I'm just trying to build a very streetable 205-210 HP 2.0L that will return decent fuel economy and be a total blast to drive. Road and Track and others have all said these cars would kick ass with 200 HP, so I'm setting out to build a dead reliable one.
I'm also building a header for the cars this next week. I've got the parts together finally and will be done by next weekend. Then it goes on the dyno again to see what was gained. Should have the results by a week from next Tuesday. This header would work on all the 2.0L's so if anyone's interested drop me a line. I'll post the results as soon as I get them.
Uh ohhh!!!!!
A supercharger vs turbo war!!
Actually I owned a 93 miata back in the day with a jackson racing supercharger. I sold it (the kit) and turboed the same car. So I got aspects from both forms of F/I. After that I owned 2 more turboed miatas and know I have the turbo mp3. As you can see I was not very impressed with the chargers, they seem a bit crude for me.
Yes the power curve was linear but the thing sounded god awful disgusting to me, and oh my god the fiddling and tuning. The belts always comming loose and those eatons have like a crackling sound to them thats awful. Did not feel refined at all. Turboes can offer just the same amount of throttle response. They are not laggy at all. We are not talking the turbos of yesteryear here, these are modern day turbos with awesome responsivness and power. Also look at all the oem manufactureres that use turbos, I can argue the point that they are just as reliable if not more so.
Hell even mazda is joining the bandwagon and making a turbo for the mazdaspeed rather than the supercharger and the miata overseas uses not a supercharger but turbo! When you get down to it, supercharger will be much more difficult to custom fabricate and will not even give near the same amount of power gains then a turbo. And I am not talking about just peak power here but the whole rpm band........ok maybe you will heve more power at 15oorpm only but I dont care about that, I care about the rest of the rpm band. If you dont beleive me and see what the weapon of choice is over on miata.net in the power forums. Do a search on turbo vs supercharger and 99% of the time the general consensus is that turbo is more practical and the better choice. Or just ask a former supercharger owner
Plus turbos sound cool as s*** and dont need anymore tuning than a supercharger(actually less because we dont have drive belts to play with). We just have to change are oil more often
A supercharger vs turbo war!!
Actually I owned a 93 miata back in the day with a jackson racing supercharger. I sold it (the kit) and turboed the same car. So I got aspects from both forms of F/I. After that I owned 2 more turboed miatas and know I have the turbo mp3. As you can see I was not very impressed with the chargers, they seem a bit crude for me.
Yes the power curve was linear but the thing sounded god awful disgusting to me, and oh my god the fiddling and tuning. The belts always comming loose and those eatons have like a crackling sound to them thats awful. Did not feel refined at all. Turboes can offer just the same amount of throttle response. They are not laggy at all. We are not talking the turbos of yesteryear here, these are modern day turbos with awesome responsivness and power. Also look at all the oem manufactureres that use turbos, I can argue the point that they are just as reliable if not more so.
Hell even mazda is joining the bandwagon and making a turbo for the mazdaspeed rather than the supercharger and the miata overseas uses not a supercharger but turbo! When you get down to it, supercharger will be much more difficult to custom fabricate and will not even give near the same amount of power gains then a turbo. And I am not talking about just peak power here but the whole rpm band........ok maybe you will heve more power at 15oorpm only but I dont care about that, I care about the rest of the rpm band. If you dont beleive me and see what the weapon of choice is over on miata.net in the power forums. Do a search on turbo vs supercharger and 99% of the time the general consensus is that turbo is more practical and the better choice. Or just ask a former supercharger owner
Plus turbos sound cool as s*** and dont need anymore tuning than a supercharger(actually less because we dont have drive belts to play with). We just have to change are oil more often
