Supercharged LP560

With that much power, would you need to do anything with the brakes? I assume CCB would hold up but would standard brakes do the job?

 

Great video, great exhaust notes! Thanks for sharing

Still waiting to hear about experiences with VF's work.

 

Anyone?

Interesting. There was a point in time when the entire focus of our business was on superchargers. I was convinced that superchargers were as good if not better than turbos. This ended the the first time I went wide open throttle in our first twin turbo car. From that moment forward we never spent another minute on supercharger development. The turbo cars run cooler, make less exhaust noise, make more power and provide a greater range of flexibility.

 

For the same money as this bolt on supercharger system we can install a bolt on twin turbo system. If you feel that the turbo system generates too much power, we can lower the boost and make supercharger like power. I'm not sure why you would ever want to, but a bolt on twin turbo LP560 can be converted back to stock in less than a day and a half.

With that much power, would you need to do anything with the brakes? I assume CCB would hold up but would standard brakes do the job?

 

Great video, great exhaust notes! Thanks for sharing

 

Braking from 170 mph to 0 in a 1000hp car is no different than a 400hp car.

Times are changing: once we in Europe thought that you americans just loved the belt/gear driven Supercharger instead of the European Turbocharger.

 

The supercharger is "true american" as reminds me the big block sport V8: huge and immediate thrust, at mid low RPM, great sound, high drivability as there is a very very small lag when you push the throttle.

 

The Turbocharger are more "europeans": smaller, lighter, faster, but without immediate brute force, a not small lag and critical drivability on open roads as the thrust rises suddendly around 3-4 K RPM, bad sound as they work as silencers at high RPM. You should not let the turbos rpm goes down or you will have a lag and a sudden thrust when you will open the throttle again: in a turn this could be very dangerous...

 

I know turbos did enormous improvement last years (that superchargers did not), they will be the future, but...

 

Turbochargers give much more mid and high RPM power than a supercharger: i think you should use them if you want a 1200+ WHp Gallardo: if i wanted "just" 750 Hp i would go for the supercharger without any doubt.

 

ciao

Braking from 170 mph to 0 in a 1000hp car is no different than a 400hp car.

 

Right - sorry - I'm making an assumption that someone who boosts HP that much is running on the track. With repeated slowing from 170 (or higher speeds) to cornering speeds my experience is that non CCB tend to get too hot and require cool down intervals. I find CCB hold up to frequent high speed/low speed cycles as experienced on a track. I should not assume that all high HP cars are track cars. I know both types of brakes need cool down intervals but the CCB took a lot more laps before needing a cool-down (my experience).

 

I know there are two schools of thought on CCB. I happen to be a fan.

Braking from 170 mph to 0 in a 1000hp car is no different than a 400hp car.

 

correct, but you hit 170+ much quicker, and likely more often making great brakes all that much more important. Both Heffner and Underground offer a BBK for that reason.

Braking from 170 mph to 0 in a 1000hp car is no different than a 400hp car.

A 1000bhp vehicle is going to punch through the air with more power than the 400bhp car therefore achieving speeds greater than that of the 400bhp vehicle.

 

Interesting. There was a point in time when the entire focus of our business was on superchargers. I was convinced that superchargers were as good if not better than turbos. This ended the the first time I went wide open throttle in our first twin turbo car. From that moment forward we never spent another minute on supercharger development. The turbo cars run cooler, make less exhaust noise, make more power and provide a greater range of flexibility.

 

For the same money as this bolt on supercharger system we can install a bolt on twin turbo system. If you feel that the turbo system generates too much power, we can lower the boost and make supercharger like power. I'm not sure why you would ever want to, but a bolt on twin turbo LP560 can be converted back to stock in less than a day and a half.

Heff, correct me if I am wrong but also wouldn't a supercharger require power from the motor? iirc the McMerc SLR's supercharger required quite a bit of power to get things going.

Heff, correct me if I am wrong but also wouldn't a supercharger require power from the motor? iirc the McMerc SLR's supercharger required quite a bit of power to get things going.

 

I remember seeing some dyno tests on this subject on a variety of supercharged cars, including the Ford GT, and most of the cars tested came in at a power loss of between 15-30hp when the s/c system was engaged versus disengaged/removed.

A 1000bhp vehicle is going to punch through the air with more power than the 400bhp car therefore achieving speeds greater than that of the 400bhp vehicle.

 

But what does that have to do with braking? 170 mph is 170 mph. I guess, like the OP said, if you can reach 170 more often then you'll need to brake more often, but that's a given.

 

But still, steel brakes do just fine.

But what does that have to do with braking? 170 mph is 170 mph. I guess, like the OP said, if you can reach 170 more often then you'll need to brake more often, but that's a given.

 

But still, steel brakes do just fine.

 

You're missing the point. A car with 750 horsepower will get up to 170 much more quickly than the same car with 400 horsepower. The first stop from 170 will be the same for either car, but in the 750 hp car you will get back up to 170 more quickly (and probably more often), meaning that with each subsequent stop from 170 the brakes will be hotter and have less time to cool. A brake upgrade would certainly be in order. Does not necessarily need to be CCB, but CCBs do tend to deal with heat much more effectively.

 

You're missing the point. A car with 750 horsepower will get up to 170 much more quickly than the same car with 400 horsepower. The first stop from 170 will be the same for either car, but in the 750 hp car you will get back up to 170 more quickly (and probably more often), meaning that with each subsequent stop from 170 the brakes will be hotter and have less time to cool. A brake upgrade would certainly be in order. Does not necessarily need to be CCB, but CCBs do tend to deal with heat much more effectively.

 

Only on a straights though. Cars can only exit a turn with some much power. I'd be interested to see what you could really do with a TTG on a track. I think only the super high hp cars are really going to see a big difference in something like that.

 

Another thing to consider is that more air will be moving over the high powered car's brakes as well. Perhaps not enough to make up for the difference, but still would make some difference, right?

 

I think the difference is going to be pretty small unless you do runway runs back to back. Just my opinion though. I really don't think there is anyway to be certain of the effects without doing testing. They may be hotter, but who knows how much hotter given the difference in approach to the same track. I'm not sure a brake upgrade would be needed anymore with a TTG than a 560. Brakes on both aren't intended for track use anyway. You'd probably want racing pads on both anyway.

 

Maybe someone with racing experience can chime in on this since while they may not have such high power cars, they certainly race cars that maintain much higher speeds.

Brian, a 1200 bhp car will keep going past 175Mph therefore you are right when you say both cars braking at that same speed but the 1200bhp will be braking at a greater speed top speed ergo requires bigger brakes.

Brian, a 1200 bhp car will keep going past 175Mph therefore you are right when you say both cars braking at that same speed but the 1200bhp will be braking at a greater speed top speed ergo requires bigger brakes.

 

If it's purely a matter of 0 - vmax - 0 as fast as possible over and over, then the bigger the better I guess. There are too many variables in realistic situations to say that bigger brakes are/aren't required.

 

Even though it's braking from a higher speed, it still may not be exceeding the ideal temperature range of the brakes. A TTG getting up to 90 instead of 50 like the regular G probably isn't going to make a big difference. Getting up to 240 vs 180 might be a bit different.

 

For street use, I don't think you'd need to upgrade the brakes. For track use, you probably want to upgrade the brakes regardless of if you have 1200hp or 600hp, and I wouldn't be surprised if you could go with the same track brakes in both cases.

VF has a bad rep with the BMW guys.

 

http://forum.e46fanatics.com/showthread.ph...charger+blow+up

 

http://forum.e46fanatics.com/showthread.ph...charger+blow+up

If it's purely a matter of 0 - vmax - 0 as fast as possible over and over, then the bigger the better I guess. There are too many variables in realistic situations to say that bigger brakes are/aren't required.

 

Even though it's braking from a higher speed, it still may not be exceeding the ideal temperature range of the brakes. A TTG getting up to 90 instead of 50 like the regular G probably isn't going to make a big difference. Getting up to 240 vs 180 might be a bit different.

 

For street use, I don't think you'd need to upgrade the brakes. For track use, you probably want to upgrade the brakes regardless of if you have 1200hp or 600hp, and I wouldn't be surprised if you could go with the same track brakes in both cases.

 

"Street use" has different meanings for different people. I am fortunate enough to have access to some roads that enable me to reach very high speeds at mulitple points. I also have a car with 1000+ horsepower. I can tell you from experience that my TTG could use better brakes because by the third 180 mph deceleration my brakes are done.

 

I could never drive my TTG on a track because it will cook its brakes within two laps. My turbo R8, on the other hand, which is just as heavy as the TTG and has similar brakes, can make it through a whole day of lapping with the pedal only getting a bit soft.

I could never drive my TTG on a track because it will cook its brakes within two laps. My turbo R8, on the other hand, which is just as heavy as the TTG and has similar brakes, can make it through a whole day of lapping with the pedal only getting a bit soft.

Why is that?

Why is that?

 

Because the TTG accelerates to much higher speeds.

"Street use" has different meanings for different people. I am fortunate enough to have access to some roads that enable me to reach very high speeds at mulitple points. I also have a car with 1000+ horsepower. I can tell you from experience that my TTG could use better brakes because by the third 180 mph deceleration my brakes are done.

 

I could never drive my TTG on a track because it will cook its brakes within two laps. My turbo R8, on the other hand, which is just as heavy as the TTG and has similar brakes, can make it through a whole day of lapping with the pedal only getting a bit soft.

 

Doesn't that depend on how much speed you have to cut down though? 180 to 60 cooks the brakes that fast? Do you go 180 - 60 - 180 - 60 - 180 - 60 in quick succession? That's probably not a very realistic way to determine how good the brakes are. You could probably cook any street brakes doing that though, right?

 

I think all cars could use better brakes, but it just depends on usage to determine if they are actually needed. In my driving experience, there are many places were I could hit really high speeds (especially with a TTG,) but there aren't so many instances where I'd want to brake really hard, then immediately speed up again to 180. Driving at such high speeds can be fun for quick bursts, but too dangerous to do for any significant amount of time on a road imo.

 

130 mph on the other hand, now thats a nice safe speed

VF has a bad rep with the BMW guys.

 

http://forum.e46fanatics.com/showthread.ph...charger+blow+up

 

http://forum.e46fanatics.com/showthread.ph...charger+blow+up

 

 

yep i'm from the bmw camp, but not from the e46 camp. i have their e36 m3 supercharger kit on my car.

 

They sold me the kit with the promise of CARB certification pending, and an aftercooler kit pending. Neither of these has happened. In reality, they used their e36 kit profits to fund their R&D for e46 development, and completely dropped any customer service related to e36 owners. This then happened to the e46 owners when the e9x came out LOL.

 

They have a horrible reputation for pointing fingers and not taking responsibility. It is virtually impossible to get anything covered under their "warranty."

 

The moral of the story is that if you have a lambo and want a little more power, get a Heffner or UGR bolt-on turbo.

 

Truth be told, 90% of s/c car owners get the itch for more boost, but are unable to do so. Many then have to switch to a turbo kit. Might as well start out with a turbo kit with the option for a built kit...

Typically a vehicle isn't moving at locked velocity it's under some acceleration or deceleration imparting load. A 1000HP vehicle accelerates differently from a 500HP vehicle. Given that human reaction time is somewhere between half and a full second, then add another second for recognition and you've potentially got two seconds of hard acceleration occurring which produces very different results in each case. Secondly on the track and sometimes off track brake fade occurs very quickly when hammering on the brakes so typical heat cycles are much higher and much more frequent in the higher HP (more often braking) vehicle. Heat dissipation models take into account work over time which is obviously higher in cars that brake more frequently.

 

Fluid boil over, severe fade or even failure after several hot laps is scary and wakes you up very quickly so assembly upgrade makes sense. It would be the first thing I'd upgrade after power, then suspension - antisway bar etc. blah blah.

The moral of the story is that if you have a lambo and want a little more power, get a Heffner or UGR bolt-on turbo.

 

Truth be told, 90% of s/c car owners get the itch for more boost, but are unable to do so. Many then have to switch to a turbo kit. Might as well start out with a turbo kit with the option for a built kit...

 

+1. And on a low boost set up with small turbine housings, ball bearing turbos, and factory compression ratio, there is essentially no turbo lag to speak of.

Typically a vehicle isn't moving at locked velocity it's under some acceleration or deceleration imparting load. A 1000HP vehicle accelerates differently from a 500HP vehicle. Given that human reaction time is somewhere between half and a full second, then add another second for recognition and you've potentially got two seconds of hard acceleration occurring which produces very different results in each case. Secondly on the track and sometimes off track brake fade occurs very quickly when hammering on the brakes so typical heat cycles are much higher and much more frequent in the higher HP (more often braking) vehicle. Heat dissipation models take into account work over time which is obviously higher in cars that brake more frequently.

 

Fluid boil over, severe fade or even failure after several hot laps is scary and wakes you up very quickly so assembly upgrade makes sense. It would be the first thing I'd upgrade after power, then suspension - antisway bar etc. blah blah.

 

Thank for this highly articulate post. I don't have nearly the depth of technical knowledge that many of you guys have, but I feel somewhat vindicated regarding my question on upgrading the brakes. I felt it was a no brainer but was not able to clearly explain why. You and a couple others have done so nicely. And in the process I've learned a lot. I agree - it would be the first thing I'd spend money on, and I'd do it with any significant power upgrade.

 

We tweaked our SL55AMG last summer. I thought it had plenty of HP. I wanted bigger brakes. My husband wanted more power. We did several things ending up with 3 more pounds of boost, approx 100 more HP and 100 more ft-lb of torque. Put high temp brake fluid in, braided brake lines, slotted rotors and ceramic pads. What a HUGE difference in slowing that car! It's certainly not a good track car (heavy) but was tons of fun and happened to be the car I started with at the track. After one season it was apparent we needed something different. I fell in love with a friend's G (he let me drive it several times at track) and the rest is history. Still love the SL - great exhaust note and acceleration, but NOTHING compares to the lambo IMHO. The brakes squealed horribly until really hot, but I loved that sound cause I knew what it meant. Now that it's no longer a track car we put the stock pads back on. It helps my husband enjoy our drives (for me the squealing was okay). Thanks again for the information you shared. I'm learning a lot!

 

Carol