Im at over 22,000 hard miles, origanal motor, 38,000 total.

 

what system is that?

 

Pettit racing supercharger

 

I only have 600 miles on mine so far, with no problem (knock on wood).

 

I've done about 30k.

 

26,000

 

SC isn't gonna harm the engine. A turbo will.

 

Utter and complete bullshit.
That has to be the dumbest thing you have ever said.

 

do you read what you post before you post it... i am still waiting for the reply about the ability to get tire pressure psi on the canscan...

wow, just wow..

beers

 

Owned!

 

I was drinking milk and you made me spit on my monitor .... (I guess I gotta stop drinking before looking at rx8club.com .....)

 

C'mon Razz, they will both shorten the life of the engine

 

Ja, but I least I made you laugh.

It's a well known fact SC's put less wear than a turbo.

Specifically speaking about rotories, check out the research Pettit has done. They even have pictures.

You won't have the SC's blowing up left and right like turbos are on the RX 8.

 

Where is this a well known fact?

 

bad tuning will blow either one just as quick. good tuning will keep either one running just as long. if the engine is tuned right you'll not have problems. airflow and a/fr are just the same. too much air not enough fuel and your engine goes boom.

 

A Supercharger itselve will often outlive a turbo becaues it spins at a much lower rpm and doesn't have to deal with hot exhaust gases, but you can't possibly draw any correlation between FI type and motor life. Boost is boost. The only argument I could possibly see is the prevalence of boost spikes with a turbo. But, with a good wastegate, boost controller, gauge and careful monitoring, that can be easily avoided.

 

So much bullshit. So little fact.

 

Internally, it spins at a similar RPM, but must deal with much higher g-loading (it is not controlled by inertia but, rather, a direct conection to a shaft/gearset so it is accellerated and slowed again without regard for its inertial load; much more stress on the bearing.)

No, you didn't.


Only in your imaginary world. As noted elsewhere, please STFU.

You are so full of bullshit it is coming out of your ears and eyes.

At similar power levels and loads, there will be as many failures on both, though it takes much more work to produce similar power levels with an SC.
Tuning is all that separates them in theory (if you ignore the complexity issue). An SC system has more failure points.

Please stop contributing. You are setting back those that are looking for real answers to a significant degree.

 

MM - a point on style: You're using the word 'contributing' rather loosely. I'd say 'posting' instead.

 

You may have a point there. I'd bet turbo's 8's outnumber SC 8's 500:1. Its hard to blow them when they hardly exist.

 

"Contributing" is not always positive - he is contributing crap.
"Posting" is rather inert - it suggests that the information provided is not necessarily asserting anything substantial.
Aparently, he believes the crap he is contributing.

 

To add to the "made you laugh" part: this ^ is funny. This has sarcasm and humor. This made me laugh. Not that other ridiculous and unfounded bullshit.

 

Thank ya! Thank ya! Thank ya vrry much!
I'm here all week.
Tip your waitresses.

 

Now this isn't that funny

 

You're right. It's kinda like a water softener for air, it softens the air which flows gently against the apex seals, causing it to clean out all the carbon deposits and make huge gains in power with absolutely no drawbacks and no chance of anything going wrong.

Turbos on the other hand is like putting a hammer to the engine, repeatedly. The air is much harder and almost always caused the engine to blow up instantly. Only the turbo people are so dumb they don't even realize the engine is running off the alternator impulse power.



PS: The government wants you to think the turbos are better. It's all a big conspiracy.