Notices
Scion xA/xB 1st-Gen Drivetrain & Power Engine and transmission discussions...

huh @ the blitz S/C

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old Dec 18, 2004 | 05:04 PM
  #1  
jct's Avatar
jct
Thread Starter
Senior Member
10 Year Member
5 Year Member
SL Member
 
Joined: Jul 2004
Posts: 13,961
Default huh @ the blitz S/C

whats the deal with the blitz S/C

and why is most ppl giving it bad reviews

whats wrong with it

besides costing around $3k for it...
Old Dec 18, 2004 | 06:42 PM
  #2  
BoomBox757's Avatar
Banned
10 Year Member
5 Year Member
SL Member
DelMarVa
 
Joined: Jan 2004
Posts: 1,962
From: Yorktown, VA
Default

it costs 3g and doesn't add that much horsepower. its the lack of poser that youget for 3g
Old Dec 18, 2004 | 08:13 PM
  #3  
Littleguy's Avatar
Member
5 Year Member
 
Joined: Apr 2004
Posts: 37
Default

But what you do get is reliability (supposedly). $3K to boost an n/a car safely isn't really that bad.
Old Dec 18, 2004 | 08:19 PM
  #4  
smurf3642's Avatar
Senior Member
10 Year Member
5 Year Member
SL Member
 
Joined: Jun 2004
Posts: 414
From: Indian River CO. - Florid
Default

where's a link to this product?
Old Dec 18, 2004 | 08:24 PM
  #5  
BoomBox757's Avatar
Banned
10 Year Member
5 Year Member
SL Member
DelMarVa
 
Joined: Jan 2004
Posts: 1,962
From: Yorktown, VA
Default

you can read more about it here.
https://www.scionlife.com/parts/revi...&sub_cat_id=32

what I heard is that is about between 20 and 30 hp.
Old Dec 18, 2004 | 09:10 PM
  #6  
jct's Avatar
jct
Thread Starter
Senior Member
10 Year Member
5 Year Member
SL Member
 
Joined: Jul 2004
Posts: 13,961
Default

its better then nothing, i rather go with the blitz S/C since it does have the elctro clutch for the S/C anyways

i want it more then a turbo anyday cause i find the coolness factor is lot better anyways
Old Dec 18, 2004 | 11:35 PM
  #7  
bdatws1_at_hotmail_com's Avatar
Member
5 Year Member
 
Joined: Nov 2004
Posts: 37
Default Re: huh @ the blitz S/C

Originally Posted by hornet_on_flower
whats the deal with the blitz S/C

and why is most ppl giving it bad reviews

whats wrong with it

besides costing around $3k for it...

Where did you see these 'bad' reviews? The 3 reviews that are actually in the 'Parts' section are pretty much glowing.
Old Dec 19, 2004 | 12:05 AM
  #8  
jct's Avatar
jct
Thread Starter
Senior Member
10 Year Member
5 Year Member
SL Member
 
Joined: Jul 2004
Posts: 13,961
Default

on the boards and else where on here but not the reviews no
Old Dec 21, 2004 | 04:37 AM
  #9  
eeyoredragon's Avatar
Senior Member
10 Year Member
5 Year Member
SL Member
 
Joined: Aug 2004
Posts: 197
From: Pensacola, FL
Default

On a mildly related note, whoever is in charge needs to remove the reviews for the TRD charger for the tC. Seeing as how it's not out yet, they obviously can't rate it. Not only that, but anyone who rates a product low and simply states "turbos have more coolness factor" should be drug into the street and shot until they either come to their senses or die *shrug*
Old Dec 21, 2004 | 04:58 AM
  #10  
showpaojoe's Avatar
Banned
10 Year Member
5 Year Member
SL Member
Scinergy
IV ACE
 
Joined: Aug 2003
Posts: 1,478
From: W. Covina, CA
Default

Well that's a unique way to put it.

But pretty much as others have said, it's low power output for what you spend and isn't upgradeable unless you get a custom pulley made and Blitz won't do that. you're basically stuck with all the NA expensive mods once you've gone with the supercharger.

It's more for show cars because Blitz is high points when it comes to name brand forced induction setups but superchargers still don't get as many points as a name brand Turbo setup. Even if you go with a basic custom turbo kit, that's not up there in points with a brand name turbo kit like Greddy or HKS.
Old Dec 22, 2004 | 03:15 AM
  #11  
jct's Avatar
jct
Thread Starter
Senior Member
10 Year Member
5 Year Member
SL Member
 
Joined: Jul 2004
Posts: 13,961
Default

they way i see it if you say this s/c come with only low end power how low are you talking about at what rpm range band

i like the sounds of low end power alot the best i've seen or should i say i was impressed by was a 58 chrysler 392 with a GMC 6-71 roots blower that was cranking out 1200 hp at 2300 rpms now thats f**kin sweet ___
Old Dec 22, 2004 | 08:22 AM
  #12  
hotbox05's Avatar
Senior Member
10 Year Member
5 Year Member

SL Member
Team N.V.S.
 
Joined: Sep 2004
Posts: 13,706
From: Sacramento, CA / Nor*Cal
Default

well most s/c's start boost around 1500. so pretty low depends on how the system is set up and the motor.
Old Dec 22, 2004 | 02:02 PM
  #13  
dgHotLava's Avatar
Senior Member
10 Year Member
5 Year Member

SL Member
Team ScioNRG
 
Joined: Feb 2004
Posts: 5,274
From: Fortress of ScioNRG
Default

Originally Posted by hotbox05
well most s/c's start boost around 1500. so pretty low depends on how the system is set up and the motor.
remember that superchargers are parasitic...
they take power to make power..
so, while they can start making boost low in the RPM's, it takes a little more to nagate the losses.
by 2500-3000RPM you notice the diff....
Old Dec 22, 2004 | 05:43 PM
  #14  
jct's Avatar
jct
Thread Starter
Senior Member
10 Year Member
5 Year Member
SL Member
 
Joined: Jul 2004
Posts: 13,961
Default

huh, pls go more into detail
Old Dec 22, 2004 | 08:56 PM
  #15  
dgHotLava's Avatar
Senior Member
10 Year Member
5 Year Member

SL Member
Team ScioNRG
 
Joined: Feb 2004
Posts: 5,274
From: Fortress of ScioNRG
Default

more detail on what???
Old Dec 22, 2004 | 09:40 PM
  #16  
jct's Avatar
jct
Thread Starter
Senior Member
10 Year Member
5 Year Member
SL Member
 
Joined: Jul 2004
Posts: 13,961
Default

on what you just said

didn't quite under stand this part "it takes a little more to nagate the losses. by 2500-3000RPM you notice the diff"
Old Dec 22, 2004 | 10:13 PM
  #17  
rotarycolt's Avatar
Senior Member
10 Year Member
5 Year Member
SL Member
 
Joined: Feb 2004
Posts: 486
Default

Originally Posted by hornet_on_flower
on what you just said

didn't quite under stand this part "it takes a little more to nagate the losses. by 2500-3000RPM you notice the diff"
It takes power to make power... usually the gain isn't that much @ lower RPM, since the boost isn't as high (with centrifugals).
Old Dec 22, 2004 | 11:08 PM
  #18  
jct's Avatar
jct
Thread Starter
Senior Member
10 Year Member
5 Year Member
SL Member
 
Joined: Jul 2004
Posts: 13,961
Default

ooooooohhhhhhhhhhhh i seeee now sorry takes me a little while to figure things out thats still lot better then the higher rpm range band



i don't really like centrifugals s/c anyways the coolness factor just isn't there in my book

the way i see it should be popping out/poking thru the hood or wtih hillborn injectors

but the sleeper look is the way to go most of the time
Old Dec 22, 2004 | 11:45 PM
  #19  
hotbox05's Avatar
Senior Member
10 Year Member
5 Year Member

SL Member
Team N.V.S.
 
Joined: Sep 2004
Posts: 13,706
From: Sacramento, CA / Nor*Cal
Default

yeah i suppose that a roots type is "cooler" a centrifugal sure does yield more power. (normally)
Old Dec 22, 2004 | 11:52 PM
  #20  
dgHotLava's Avatar
Senior Member
10 Year Member
5 Year Member

SL Member
Team ScioNRG
 
Joined: Feb 2004
Posts: 5,274
From: Fortress of ScioNRG
Default

Originally Posted by hornet_on_flower
the way i see it should be popping out/poking thru the hood or wtih hillborn injectors
wouldn't that look silly sittin' sideways????



All times are GMT. The time now is 11:53 AM.