|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2000
Posts: 1,090
Member
|
OP
Member
Joined: May 2000
Posts: 1,090 |
Who here wishes they had a 3.0 instead of a blown 2.5? I only want to do one or the other, not both, so I'm leaning towards the 3.0, but I like the way the blower looks sitting under the hood. What do you guys think of your SC's vs. extra displacement?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2000
Posts: 1,296
Moderator
|
|
Moderator
Joined: Jun 2000
Posts: 1,296 |
With some of the guys on the board only putting out an extra 10 or 15 hores with the 3.0 I would much reather have the S/C.
Tim
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2001
Posts: 3,419
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Jun 2001
Posts: 3,419 |
Originally posted by Corbett:
With some of the guys on the board only putting out an extra 10 or 15 hores with the 3.0 I would much reather have the S/C. All a matter of proper tuning. Very soon I will leave the "10 or 15 extra horses" club.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jul 2000
Posts: 2,708
Moderator
|
|
Moderator
Joined: Jul 2000
Posts: 2,708 |
I like the drivability of the forced induction over naturally aspirated. People who have driven or rode in the SCed Contours know what I am talking about.
-Mark
You can do something for Love...
You can do something for Money...
But there is nothing quite so satisfying as doing something out of Spite.
GTExtreme1@aol.com
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2000
Posts: 1,296
Moderator
|
|
Moderator
Joined: Jun 2000
Posts: 1,296 |
Originally posted by PA 3L SVT:
All a matter of proper tuning. Very soon I will leave the "10 or 15 extra horses" club. Point taken but with that same ammount of tuning you could crank out an extra 20 or 30 horses out of the S/C
Tim
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2000
Posts: 1,611
Moderator
|
|
Moderator
Joined: Nov 2000
Posts: 1,611 |
What's wrong with doing both? 
The first Blown 3 Liter!
"Drive it till the wheels fall off" -my personal motto!!!!
98.5 T-Red SVT #6180
Many Mods
Buckshot77@aol.com
Owner of 00 #1611 Silver
Totalled on 10/7/01
SVT Parts for Sale
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2000
Posts: 1,296
Moderator
|
|
Moderator
Joined: Jun 2000
Posts: 1,296 |
LOL....I did not hear that.
Tim
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2001
Posts: 452
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Aug 2001
Posts: 452 |
I apologize, but I'm not completely familiar with the Contour powerplant...what is the big factor hindering Chris Hightower (or anybody, for that matter) frommanufacturing a turbocharger for the SVT or whatever? I mean, in my opinion, there's no better way to gain massive amounts of horsepower with almost no added weight.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2000
Posts: 1,090
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: May 2000
Posts: 1,090 |
Originally posted by typhoon:
I apologize, but I'm not completely familiar with the Contour powerplant...what is the big factor hindering Chris Hightower (or anybody, for that matter) frommanufacturing a turbocharger for the SVT or whatever? I mean, in my opinion, there's no better way to gain massive amounts of horsepower with almost no added weight. Packaging mostly...I think. Also, the SVT runs a pretty high compression ratio as it is...not a good candidate for a bolt-on kit. But mostly...probably lack of cash from individuals...and manufacturers not sensing enough interest.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2000
Posts: 1,090
Member
|
|
OP
Member
Joined: May 2000
Posts: 1,090 |
Originally posted by Corbett:
With some of the guys on the board only putting out an extra 10 or 15 hores with the 3.0 I would much reather have the S/C. I think with proper tuning, I can get 225-230 whp from a NA 3.0. I know that Bob King put down 294 whp with his prototype Vortech, but that was with tweaking from Vadim/SHOshop. It baselined at somewhere around 260hp with the standard pulley.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
