PDA

View Full Version : Supercharger for our 3?



baymoe
06-03-2008, 02:21 AM
Anyone have inside news at Eaton or other makers of superchargers whether they're going to create one for our Mazda3? I want one for my 3!

WhiteSpeed3
06-03-2008, 07:18 AM
we were talking about this for a bit last night with some of the focus guys

i personally think there supercharger will fit the 3 due to having the same 2.0L and the 2.3L engines but i dont think anyone has tried yet

Skarbro
06-03-2008, 08:00 AM
Superchargers are quickly becoming a thing of the past. GM had to switch to turbos on a lot of their supercharged cars because of tougher emission standards. Hmm.. I'm a little off topic I guess.

Wild Weasel
06-03-2008, 08:24 AM
How are emissions affected differently for a supercharger than they are for a turbo? There are advantages and disadvantages to each. This is the first I've heard that they're becoming a thing of the past.

midnightfxgt
06-03-2008, 08:34 AM
I know there was extensive talk about Focus Supercharger kits on the Mazda3, and without a ton of work, they would not fit. I cant remember the exact reason it wouldnt though....

I would still rather a turbo over a SC :)

-John

mleblond
06-03-2008, 09:17 AM
turbo FTW!!!!

mogul_pro
06-03-2008, 09:27 AM
I'd RATHER have a trubo of course... but superchargers are usually significantly cheaper by comparison.

Scarbro, why would you say a supercharged engine is harder to pass emission standards over a turbo on the same engine? Just curious because I had a turbo on my last car, but no personal experience with superchargers, but I can't see why that would be the case at all. They are pretty reliable units, more so than turbochargers in my opinion.

mogul_pro
06-03-2008, 09:29 AM
Also, since the focus has the same engine, I am sure its just a fitment issue. I don't know why they would NOT make it for the mazda3 that being the case. I am sure they could reuse alot of the same parts in the focus 'kit' for the 3. Oh well.. every time I investigate a turbo kit for my 3, I always come to the conclusion that if I am going to spend t hat kind of money on a car I'd rather sell the 3 and get a completely differant car all together in a higher price bracket.

Skarbro
06-03-2008, 09:36 AM
How are emissions affected differently for a supercharger than they are for a turbo? There are advantages and disadvantages to each. This is the first I've heard that they're becoming a thing of the past.
I read it in the Star a while back. The Cobalt SS supercharged was scrapped because of emissions. A turbo replacement is supposed to be better on emissions. I don't know. It doesn't make a lot of sense to me either. I guess I am going by memory on this one!

mogul_pro
06-03-2008, 09:56 AM
Maybe because its not the same engine either? (I dono..)

But the new SS is pretty powerfull and light... brembos come standard too.. pretty sweet... i wouldnt want one but i can understand why people would... speeding tickets come standard too lol.

baymoe
06-03-2008, 10:04 AM
Reason for asking was because of the ease of installation and Plug and Play nature (most of them anyhow) of superchargers. For someone like myself who haven't touched FI, and would like to get into it, want to start off with superchargers for that fact.

The linear power delivery is a plus also :)

Wild Weasel
06-03-2008, 10:21 AM
Superchargers aren't really any more "plug and play" than a turbo is. Both need the same sort of fuel delivery and sensor upgrades to make them work.

I thought they went with the turbo on the new Cobalt just because it was more powerful and it made more sense to use the turbo version across the board than to keep it on some cars like the Solstice and HHR while keeping the blower on the Cobalt.

A supercharger is generally a safer system, and tends to be more seamlessly drivable for the average person.

mogul_pro
06-03-2008, 10:35 AM
Yea I wouldn't really say that superchargers are a thing fo the past... the new z06 will have a supercharger... :) And instant boost.... no lag is good lag!

midnightfxgt
06-03-2008, 10:37 AM
Superchargers aren't really any more "plug and play" than a turbo is. Both need the same sort of fuel delivery and sensor upgrades to make them work.

+1. There is nothing more plug and play about it.

A blower has better linear power, but a turbo has potential for more power, and with very very little effort (can be a good point, or bad lol)

-John

Skarbro
06-03-2008, 11:08 AM
Superchargers aren't really any more "plug and play" than a turbo is.
I wanted to post that .gif you made of little Weasel installing the charger on the Sunfire but I can't find it. LOL

Kevin@nextmod
06-03-2008, 11:37 AM
I guess the cobalt went with turbo probably because of power and fuel economy. I guess as long as you stay under the range, the turbo won't kick in and you save gas. The super charger kicks in at low rpm causing the thirsty engine.

Wild Weasel
06-03-2008, 11:42 AM
A supercharger, when not under boost, takes almost no power to turn, so there's no loss of economy there. It only kicks in when needed (heavier throttle), otherwise it spins freely.

Kevin@nextmod
06-03-2008, 11:43 AM
A supercharger, when not under boost, takes almost no power to turn, so there's no loss of economy there. It only kicks in when needed (heavier throttle), otherwise it spins freely.
Oh.....now that i don't know, i have no experience with either so i was just guesssing.

Wild Weasel
06-03-2008, 11:52 AM
There's a bypass on the blower that opens up under vacuum so until the throttle opens up enough to reduce the vacuum enough to close that valve, the blower is free-spinning and needs less than 1 hp. It's basically a fancy idler pulley with some spinning bits attached to it.

baymoe
06-03-2008, 12:09 PM
There's a bypass on the blower that opens up under vacuum so until the throttle opens up enough to reduce the vacuum enough to close that valve, the blower is free-spinning and needs less than 1 hp. It's basically a fancy idler pulley with some spinning bits attached to it.

Didn't know that. Cool.

saintjames7
06-03-2008, 12:39 PM
I read it in the Star a while back. The Cobalt SS supercharged was scrapped because of emissions. A turbo replacement is supposed to be better on emissions. I don't know. It doesn't make a lot of sense to me either. I guess I am going by memory on this one!

Not only has The Cobalt SS dropped the supercharger, Mini Cooper S has dropped the supercharged engine for a turbo also.

midnightfxgt
06-03-2008, 12:49 PM
Easy explaination... Turbo > SC :) JK JK!

WhiteSpeed3
06-03-2008, 01:25 PM
will i work at a GM dealership and im gonna look into this thing about why they switch and will update u guys but im pretty sure this thread is a serious case of thread jacking

1flycdnM3
06-03-2008, 08:25 PM
I am with Vince on this one and I think everything that has needed to be said has been "re-hashed" to death now :)

only thing to really know that is important is this:

Turbocharger > Supercharger

*lol*

Mijunk
06-03-2008, 09:38 PM
My understanding is GM switched for 2 reasons. One being that the contract with Eaton was up, and two they had the turbo from the Solstice with more power. The turbo motor has better emissions because of direct injection.

WhiteSpeed3
06-03-2008, 11:26 PM
so here is the scoop from my dealerships VP

Reason 1. more power

Reason 2. more fuel economy and something called the CAFE program by 2013 every company be it GM, Mazda, Ford whateve they have a certain miles per gallon on average for all there vehicals

Reason 3. less emissions b/c of a turbo takes time to spool up and the s/c gets there power right away so there is very small difference but there is some

now back on topic about superchargers for the mazda3

Kevin@nextmod
06-04-2008, 12:48 AM
If only theres an tunable ECU for the mazda 3. The RSX have the kpro which you can tune the N/A engine and it actually works. $1400 and it makes your car very freakin fast.

Flagrum_3
06-04-2008, 08:18 AM
Anyone have inside news at Eaton or other makers of superchargers whether they're going to create one for our Mazda3? I want one for my 3!

Have you tried emailing any manufacturers for this info? That would be your best bet I would think! ...because I don't think anyone here has insider info.



_3


.

Skarbro
06-04-2008, 08:33 AM
I know this isn't what anyone wants to hear, but I don't know of any insurance companies outside of Facility that would insure a car with an aftermarket supercharger. You'll be taking a big risk because claims would be denied if they found out...

yearoftherat
06-04-2008, 09:58 AM
I know this isn't what anyone wants to hear, but I don't know of any insurance companies outside of Facility that would insure a car with an aftermarket supercharger. You'll be taking a big risk because claims would be denied if they found out...
I'm sure no insurance company would insure car with an aftermarket turbo either..

mogul_pro
06-04-2008, 01:56 PM
Yup thats the reason I own a Mazda3....

I had an integra type-r with a turbo on it among other things.. and they asked for a picure of my engine bay... said thats not the stock engine (it was the JDM version) and you have an aftermarket turbo... we are denying you coverage. I had 30 days to find a new car...

midnightfxgt
06-04-2008, 02:01 PM
Once my CF work is done and I am back from my honeymoon, I am insuring mine properly with the turbo and everything :)

Wild Weasel
06-04-2008, 04:03 PM
Can I ask how? Are you going to pay Facility rates??

midnightfxgt
06-04-2008, 06:09 PM
$200/month if the car is appraised at 25K isnt bad :). Facility has OK rates, but gets a bum rap since all the people others wont insure are forced to go to them. Of course they will have high rates, with bad records :)

condor888000
06-04-2008, 09:36 PM
I bet if you go to facility after you've been dropped they jack the rates, but if you go there when you choose it's not as bad. Just thinking out loud here.

midnightfxgt
06-05-2008, 09:57 AM
I bet if you go to facility after you've been dropped they jack the rates, but if you go there when you choose it's not as bad. Just thinking out loud here.

You got it! I think facility is a bit higher than most, so under normal circumstances people go elsewhere. However, when you have no other option for insurance they will take you (at a cost!), and thats where the bad image comes from.

-John

Gods Son
06-05-2008, 12:22 PM
There's a bypass on the blower that opens up under vacuum so until the throttle opens up enough to reduce the vacuum enough to close that valve, the blower is free-spinning and needs less than 1 hp. It's basically a fancy idler pulley with some spinning bits attached to it.

Excellent explanation.

ksukh
06-26-2008, 01:04 PM
Maybe because its not the same engine either? (I dono..)

But the new SS is pretty powerfull and light... brembos come standard too.. pretty sweet... i wouldnt want one but i can understand why people would... speeding tickets come standard too lol.

LOL,
That's too true...but I have a friend who has a cobalt SS/SC...it's pretty nice. He let me drive it...it's almost like an American Ricer lol...we call it wheat...yeah that's not funny but it drives nice none the less.

Ken

condor888000
06-26-2008, 02:17 PM
F2 in Cali is just finishing up their turbo kit and are starting work on a S/C for the 3. Saw this thread pop up and thought I'd throw that out there.