When it comes to superchargers and their impact on the crankshaft snout, the type and placement of the supercharger can indeed affect the load. Centrifugal Superchargers: These are typically mounted further forward compared to other types. They tend to place less load on the crankshaft snout because they use a belt-driven system that doesn’t require as much direct force on the crankshaft. Roots-Type Superchargers (e.g., Whipple): These are mounted directly on top of the engine and can place more load on the crankshaft snout due to their position and the way they are driven. Twin Vortices Series (TVS) Superchargers: These are similar to Roots-type in terms of mounting and load on the crankshaft snout. They are also mounted on top of the engine and can exert significant force on the crankshaft
supposedly.... theres been no crank snout failures with an ESS yet. That being said, theres nowhere near the amount of ESS out there as there is procharger/vortech/whipple. All of which have broken cranks. I have no idea how that works though or why they dont put a lot of stress on the snout.
I had a Roush Phase 2 installed on my 2017 GT/PP three years ago this November at Brenspeed and it's been flawless. It's my daily driver and I need to pass emissions every two years. I did Roush especially for their connection to Ford. It's all a matter of what you want to achieve and personal preference.
One of the best replies I've seen explaining the two. Thanks
Mmmm.... PBJ and coke. Now I'm hungry!
Out of all the kits I have personally driven. 2013 with a Roush, 2011 with an f1a94 Procharger and an 18 with a Vortech V3Jt, the Vortech has the only one that uses the stock tensioner, so there really isn't much more load. Plus I left it 6rib, id rather have the belt slip than break my shit.
They're basically useless so who cares.
This whole argument is overrated.
Why does everyone always go to roll racing? Never seen a drag race start at 40They're basically useless so who cares.
This whole argument is overrated.
I can hook from a 40 roll in 2nd with a Whipple. If you have a centrifugal car, you're going to downshift to get into the powerband and you'll be making plenty of power, the dyno sheet from this ESS car for example is making 475 lb/ft at 5500rpm and will definitely hit the tires hard.
Sure the Whipple will make more torque lower in the powerband, and maybe a little more torque overall, but when you get on it, either car is going to be at the same RPM and the centrifugal is going to a lot closer in torque at those higher RPMs than some people think. If anything you want the extra power down low for when you aren't quite in the powerband yet because of gearing etc.
I get it, you're defending your choice. But the ESS is about half the cost so that alone is enough for me. Again, low end torque is what kills your drivetrain. That seat pushback feeling is nice though!They're basically useless so who cares.
This whole argument is overrated.
I can hook from a 40 roll in 2nd with a Whipple. If you have a centrifugal car, you're going to downshift to get into the powerband and you'll be making plenty of power, the dyno sheet from this ESS car for example is making 475 lb/ft at 5500rpm and will definitely hit the tires hard.
Sure the Whipple will make more torque lower in the powerband, and maybe a little more torque overall, but when you get on it, either car is going to be at the same RPM and the centrifugal is going to a lot closer in torque at those higher RPMs than some people think. If anything you want the extra power down low for when you aren't quite in the powerband yet because of gearing etc.