Scott...fact is your car has had more backfires through the intake than my nitrous car has ever had. I have had zero. I have no worries of nitrous backfires. And what would you know about 600 rwhp?

when cost is a factor...and your goal is not that lofty in terms of HP, Nitrous is the best answer.
If you have extra money...or are reaching for extreme HP from a givin cubes...turbo it is.

Just sit down and plan out a car that has a specific goal in terms of HP. Say...500 rwhp. At that level..you have many options. Use either a 351 based motor or an LS1. You could do it NA with more cubes and a serious build, nitrous, S/C or turbo. Nitrous would likely be the most cost effective. Turbo would be quite expensive in comparison....and for a measly 500 rwhp? So for me...I would not spend that extra cash. Id put it in the chassis or a tranny or a CONVERTER

Use the same modle for a car that needs 1000 hp from the same motors. Now turbo looks alot more attractive...even in terms of money comparisons. A 1000 hp LS1 on nitrous will likely cost as much in the end as a turbo setup of the same HP. The nitrous version would almost certainly be solid roller with super expensive heads, larger cubes with expensive crank, intake, headers, etc. The turbo would probably be in the same ballpark in cost but using heads like the regular LS1 stage II's, normal hydrualic cam and valvetrain, LS6 intake, etc ,etc just like the one Kurt put together that made 1300hp to keep cost down.


Actually...I disagree. I have seen several turbo turds that are not mated to thier setup well. More of a dyno queen than something that will actually get down the track well. A nitrous setup seems to be more forgiving in that regard.


Thats my philosophy. If someone just has to have a turbo...then all that is moot. There is a coolness factor to a turbo for some. Me...I could care less. I will do whatever is required to reach my goals at the time for the least amount of cash.

 

Ill never understand how you can so consistantly twist shit to fit. I was simply stating my views in a matter of fact way and now your upset. Seemed to me this was on topic for the most part....until now.

Scott...I have NEVER had a nitrous backfire. Not once...ever! Sorry to dissapoint...no need to try to fabricate BS. You did have those carb farts you try so hard to deny. The whole stands saw it. Its really not a big deal....dont know why you are so touchy with that. Maybe it doesnt jive with your "perfect" setup you like to portray.

Nitrous can be more forgiving because on and off points are a matter of swapping rpm pills and the Tq is instant and huge. You can tailor those activation point and power levels much easier.

I never said turbo is solely the way to go. I said its the way to go if you want huge power for a max effort. With mid range goals there are multiple choices that may make better sense...especially from a cost POV.

You act as if editing my posts...rewriteing certain parts to be clearer, and correcting spelling is something negative? Sorry...just dont see it.

 

Oh...and we have gone over this many many times...but since you like to revisit it now and then.

My car at 500 rwhp= 10.4 at 131 mph

Your car at 500 rwhp= 10.95 at 126mph

I dont need 600 rwhp for 10s either

 

Sorry...its not my fault you are pretty much thought of in this GM forum as an "assclown".
You have built your own reputation here. Want to post here without getting backlash...change your tactics. I am not going to force the regular GM people that post in this section to cater to you by editing them and thier opinions. 90% of the time you post here to create a stir...and you know it. Gator jumped on you a bit this time (sounds like he was drunk )...but thats based on many previous encounters.
The common factor to all of the blown up threads is always, always YOU.


Editing that last week was a mistake...my apologies....wont happen again...I guarentee that.

 

You said many times your dyno numbers would be equal to 500 rwhp on a dynojet. I can dig it up for you if you like? My 500 rwhp was on a dyno jet with a 100 shot.
Again me at 500 rwhp = 10.4 at 131 time after time
you at 500 rwhp barely cracking 10s

I went 10.7s second time to the track after the 383 was done back in winter of 2000.

You are correct my car is a 383...you would be correct that I am alot faster too only pushing it to 6/7 of its past capabilties. But who cares.....about all that.

Im just trying to figure out why your such an asshole.

 

Psst...Scott...havent you had your car for 14 years????

And check out the below qoutes...which is it...450..500...ot whichever is convienent to back your ever changing arguement. Im gonna start calling you John kerry..waffle man.