Nelson racing 454 engine

[supremeefi]

Originally Posted by Mathi

Hi sir,
To be honest, I'm thinking about participate a large trip with sportscars (modball), kinda Gumball but less expensive. And not only that but also because I'm just addicted to hp... I have on this moment a Roush 427R in my stang and I can drive it like I stole it but you all know how it goes.
I know this engine is really reliable, you can take it out to everywhere...

The Nelson engines look incredible and are high end engines, it would look amazing in my car...

Where are you located? EFI?

[gnx7]

With enuf cubic inches you can have a 600-700hp n/a daily driver without issues. The main downside is bad fuel economy and low end driveability.

A turbo or supercharger combined with a smaller cam will make it much more driveable and have the potential for waaaaaay more power

[Mathi]

Originally Posted by Sieg

Understood, I was playing advocate as you don't always know the reality of who you're dealing with in the forum environment.

A dry sump Thompson LS9 would work nicely in your Ford.

What kind of power is your Roush motor producing?

The roush produces 550hp. It's pretty fast already...

Regards

[Mathi]

Originally Posted by supremeefi

Where are you located? EFI?

I'm located in Belgium, Europe.

Regards

[Mathi]

To be honest, I drove always carburated engines. I live in Belgium so high end cars with crazy engines, you don't find it here.
I'm curious to superchargers or turbo's? I understand that the car handles completely different with a supercharger or turbo instead of a normal fuel injection (which don't do anything for more hp) or carburator?

Anyone knows a good company which build high end reliable turbo engines?

Maybe it's not bad to think about a supercharged or turbo engine for that much of hp.

Regards

[clill]

Mayhem has a 887hp 427 Supercharged LS engine that Thompson built. It runs on pump gas, gets over 20mpg with the ac on and does it making only 10 lbs of boost. Between supercharged and Turbo-ed I would go with the Supercharger. A much more linear torque curve. I own both. Most turbo engines have low compression and until you nail the throttle they feel underpowered. The Supercharged car makes it all the time.

[mikels]

Originally Posted by clill

Mayhem has a 887hp 427 Supercharged LS engine that Thompson built. It runs on pump gas, gets over 20mpg with the ac on and does it making only 10 lbs of boost. Between supercharged and Turbo-ed I would go with the Supercharger. A much more linear torque curve. I own both. Most turbo engines have low compression and until you nail the throttle they feel underpowered. The Supercharged car makes it all the time.

Echoing Charlie's comments:

Having worked on many supercharged engines (as well as countless NA and turbo engines), I can tell you it is impossible to beat the overall driveability, controllability and outright power balance that supercharging provides. In particular with the latest SC technology like Eaton TVS superchargers.

I attached a graph for comparison showing Thomson's 427 Supercharged engine (from Mayhem) with one of Thomson's 442 cubic inch LS7's (from Corvette). Besides the power curves pointing out the very obvious, it does not begin to show the differences in driveability. (not sure how to place picture in post)

Both these engines make great power, run on pump gas, etc. - but with the SC engine, there is no 'special' instructions needed to drive it (other than be aware when applying throttle!). The NA engine continously reminds you what it's all about - and has some driveability characteristics that are not ideal.

I like an agressive cam and loping idle as much as anyone, but once you've experienced the overall package of a well done positive displacment blown engine...... well, it makes it hard to be satisfied with anything less.

[Stuart Adams]

Originally Posted by mikels

Echoing Charlie's comments:

Having worked on many supercharged engines (as well as countless NA and turbo engines), I can tell you it is impossible to beat the overall driveability, controllability and outright power balance that supercharging provides. In particular with the latest SC technology like Eaton TVS superchargers.

I attached a graph for comparison showing Thomson's 427 Supercharged engine (from Mayhem) with one of Thomson's 442 cubic inch LS7's (from Corvette). Besides the power curves pointing out the very obvious, it does not begin to show the differences in driveability. (not sure how to place picture in post)

Both these engines make great power, run on pump gas, etc. - but with the SC engine, there is no 'special' instructions needed to drive it (other than be aware when applying throttle!). The NA engine continously reminds you what it's all about - and has some driveability characteristics that are not ideal.

I like an agressive cam and loping idle as much as anyone, but once you've experienced the overall package of a well done positive displacment blown engine...... well, it makes it hard to be satisfied with anything less.

Great info.

[camcojb]

Originally Posted by mikels

I attached a graph for comparison showing Thomson's 427 Supercharged engine (from Mayhem) with one of Thomson's 442 cubic inch LS7's (from Corvette). Besides the power curves pointing out the very obvious, it does not begin to show the differences in driveability. (not sure how to place picture in post)

I attached a pic for you Dave. Thanks for the great info.

[DaleTx]

Originally Posted by mikels

Echoing Charlie's comments:

Having worked on many supercharged engines (as well as countless NA and turbo engines), I can tell you it is impossible to beat the overall driveability, controllability and outright power balance that supercharging provides. In particular with the latest SC technology like Eaton TVS superchargers.

I attached a graph for comparison showing Thomson's 427 Supercharged engine (from Mayhem) with one of Thomson's 442 cubic inch LS7's (from Corvette). Besides the power curves pointing out the very obvious, it does not begin to show the differences in driveability. (not sure how to place picture in post)

Both these engines make great power, run on pump gas, etc. - but with the SC engine, there is no 'special' instructions needed to drive it (other than be aware when applying throttle!). The NA engine continously reminds you what it's all about - and has some driveability characteristics that are not ideal.

I like an agressive cam and loping idle as much as anyone, but once you've experienced the overall package of a well done positive displacment blown engine...... well, it makes it hard to be satisfied with anything less.

Mike, great post... very impressive results on both of the engine builds (SC & NA). Both engines have very nice linear HP and Torque curves. Question for you…. what is the difference in weight between the SC engine and NA engine? I’ve always wondered how much extra weight is added on the front of the car with the super charger set up.

To the OP... Comparing a carburated engine to EFI... I have a 670 HP 427" EFI LS engine...and like Charlie... I get 20 plus mpg cruising on the street. You just can't beat the technology and efficiency of the new engines. I know that I would never do another carburated engine build after running the fuel injected LS engine. You can run higher compression, larger cams, and make more HP, while still being streetable.

Once you get up around 600 HP at the wheels it's all good. For what you want to do the super charger sounds like the best bet