[quote=Excelerate;11795388] IHC, I have a business to run and I'm working 12-14 hour days so I can't argue with you on these threads. Just look back through the threads. As Kennedy mentioned, two guys were HBP and nitrous, one had an injector failure and if you read through Opel's threads you will find that he had a HBP. He contradicted himself in a couple threads; one time saying it was the supercharger's fault and then another time saying he installed a HBP to see how much the motor could take to blow it up. He seems to be a knowledgeable guy but he also seems to be pretty aggressive with his vehicle.

Yes, he stated that he blew it up with the HBP and other problems but he also stated that he blew it up in stock kit form the first time.

Again, it's not about money or how easily the Comptech kit could've worked. It's about them marketing it as a complete kit when it wasn't. People paid a lot of money, didn't know any better, and ended up hurting a lot of engines. If they sell a bolt on kit and a DIY engine management I'm all for that as long as it's made clear to the consumer.

They work......for a while.

These guys are not dumb. They didn't accidentally release a bad kit thinking it was good. If it was so obvious to me on the internet years ago, you can bet they knew what they were doing was wrong.

You have to look at the type of driving as I stated. I have no idea how Accuratein drove but it looks more show than go.

Michael Benz autocrossed his. Watch any video of it an you'll see that he was rarely on the throttle for more than 3 seconds and rarely past second or the bottom of third gear. You can generally get away with this sort of driving and a bad tune. It's when you get into the higher gears for prolonged periods that a bad tune is going to show up.

That's a very bad assumption. I've had the GN since I was 17 years old and it was stock for about a month. It was my only car until I got the Tl with a brief go with a commuter Celica.

I commuted to work in it from Bakersfield to Fresno and back everyday, a 210 mile round trip in a 10.60 turbo car. Many people have a quick "street car" but not many could truly commute in one like I have. Over the last 5 years or so it's been making over 100hp more than at 10.60, it will likely be in the 9s once I make it to the track and it's been daily driven in this form. It was my daily driver from '94 to '06 when I bought the TL and it still got driven a lot up to '07 when I made the decision to quit driving it everywhere only due to it's rarity.

Check out the sig, 602rwhp, over 620lbs of torque daily driven for many, many years. Once I got the tuning down and learned the proper way to build it I've never had an issue. At full power it's at 29psi and still no issues. I broke an axle not that long ago but 5 years of mid 11s, another few years of mid 10s and 5 years of who knows how fast finally killed the stock axle. I don't think we can blame that on the fact that it's turbocharged.

The things you mention like loose bolts and leaks are all install related. I've logged over 300,000 miles on this turbo car. In the early days I had problems like you mentioned but as I grew accustomed to working on it, I haven't had a loose bolt, exhaust leak, oil leak, etc in many, many years, in fact it's been over 100,000 miles.

You make no mention of the differences in builds with the turbo vs supercharged cars. Turbos are easier to change, modify, and play with. If you don't know what you're doing, sure, there may be problems but it's not the turbo's fault. Turbos are known to be more problem free period.

Once again, I have never stated that a supercharger is bad, only this particular supercharger kit.

These are the people I've been so lucky to have been associated with since I was 17. Troy at S&S here locally is amazing. We raced against each other as kids for fun and unfortunately for me I had to get out of it.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jrql_K4DBow

This is one of the Mustangs. There are more turbo secrets in this car than you would ever believe from the type of exhaust tubing to the intercooler, to even the wastegate making more hp, you would not believe the technology in this car and by the way, it's carbureted and very drivable.

This thing makes 800hp normally at 8-10psi and in the beginning of this video it was cranked to 21psi and was making 1,200hp at the wheels. Weight with driver is 2,300lbs. It goes from 90-170mph in just over 3 seconds. This is the stuff I've been around and a small part of my whole life. This is why I have to LOL when you question my involvement in forced induction. Not only do I daily drive one, my 600rwhp driver is very mild compared to the race stuff. This may come off as bragging but you won't find one post where I have brought any of this outside stuff up until now.

 

The difference here is I post facts as facts and opinions as opinions. There are a couple in this thread that post opinions as facts. Misinformation is bad.

 

No you are not right in reference to your comments about the CT-E Kit. It did not end up "hurting a lot of engines" due to faulty engineering. It was due to additional mods that customers installed that CT-E didn't accomodate for. And if someone is stupid enough to be in 5th gear at full throttle for 30 seconds then that is a real issue. The amount of load on a vehicle in that gear at those RPM's with that power is serious and you are destined to break something.

And arguing a point with a factory turbocharged Grand National is kind of silly. We're talking about vehicles that were naturally aspirated that now have forced induction. And no it is not always installer error when an issue arises with someone's car.

Unfortunately I don't have the leisure or time to make a post tit for tat with you. I have a lot of work to do and it's 10:30 so if you post again be advised it doesn't mean I'm agreeing; I just don't have time to do this.

 

I'm on my 11th straight 11 hour day, you're not the only one that works a lot.

Yes, I'm arguing the point of my turbo car that I've put 300,000 miles on and pushed past 600rwhp. I don't see how that's any less rel event on the turbo vs supercharger debate. It's a factory setup, yes. It shows that a well designed turbo setup is trouble free. You're the one that said I have no experience in a daily driver turbo car when in fact I have more than most people.

 

LOL I'm not in a contest with you. I'm just trying to take care of my customers and trying to make sure members see the other side of the story b/c some of the things that are said in this thread are NOT true.

It's obvious that we are all falling short of the mark. I guess servicing Porsche Cayman S, Lamborghini Gallardos, BMW M5s, M3s, 700 HP R32's, 400-600 HP Honda/Acuras, 650+ HP EVO's and many many more doesn't put us in a league to have any valid or legitimate points about FI or this particular kit. You have a GN and it never has any issues. Case closed.

 

sorry to change the subject... but its 11:10. arent you supposed to be asleep?

 

It has nothing to do with the fact that it was a GN. It would have the same relevance if it were an EVO, TL, Gallardo, etc. The GN just happens to be the car I have the most experience with. I've also done a good bit of Ford modular FI both supercharged and turbocharged. In the '90s I did a lot of SVO 2.3 turbo stuff. I don't see the point in getting in a pissing contest here.

I'm not trying to take anything away from you or your business you but correct me if I'm wrong but you're a reseller, correct? You don't actually R&D this stuff. I've done many things from the ground up and I've made enough mistakes and had enough success to look at most kits and know off the bat if they're going to be somewhat reliable.

The TL will be reliable within a certain hp window if tuned properly. We don't know what that window is yet because the blower blew engines prematurely at the 300whp mark due to the tune and the turbos numbers are still climbing past the 490hp mark without failures due to a good tune. Keep the TL within this window, whatever it may be and there's not going to be a significant difference in engine life from the low end to the high end of the window. Unfortunately you can't explore the TL's true hp potential when it's detonating like crazy with the management the blower comes with.

 

sounds good...cause i can really care about any of these cars.

IHC's, please dont take this personal, but im growing so tiresome of hearing about the GN. it has a turbo, but thats where the comparisons should end. different cars, different era's, different everything..


again, i understand the point your trying to make, but unless one of the "many things" was a forced inducted TL, i have zero interest..





this is getting so redundant =/ tell you what, why dont we throw the whole "out-of-the-box" reliability out the window for good, and lets pretend the comptech kit came "complete" i think its safe to say that ALL of us here, know there is a viable tuning option in the fi/c and ill bet even the noobs planning to SC their TL's have it on their check list.

we have to move forward here and talk about now, not then. cause now there is an answer to the tuning problem. the fi/c is just as important to the SC as it is to the TC and cant be ruled out just because its not included.

 

sorry excelerate, but what exactly is NOT TRUE in this thread concerning the CT supercharger kit? and excelerate we are not trying to take buisness away from u, people just need the facts. both kits have similiar reliability if properly tuned end of story. however, mechanically speaking turbo is always going to be more efficient than a supercharger. but i agree that turbos have not always been reliable in the past, however nowadays the technology that goes into making turboes makes them basically "maintainence free". im not an expert, nor claim to be one of FI but do know that both kits are good just the turbo kit is more "full" kit out of the box. that is all i have to say.

 

this is getting so redundant =/ tell you what, why dont we throw the whole "out-of-the-box" reliability out the window for good, and lets pretend the comptech kit came "complete" i think its safe to say that ALL of us here, know there is a viable tuning option in the fi/c and ill bet even the noobs planning to SC their TL's have it on their check list.


^^ 04accordcpe, i look up to u myself man, but a turbo car is a turbo car, it makes no difference if the GN was from a older era, i mean if IHC is still running his stock turbocharger, which i highly doubt, it would only strengthen the claim that turbocharger are mechanically in themselves maintainence free even back in the GN era. love both kits, just see more possibility/flexibility/expandability with turbo setup that the supercharger could only dream of. my again

 

im not arguing the fact that its a different car, different era, and yada yada.... the arguement here is about reliability of each kit for the TL... so his GN has absolutely no relevance... people here including myself have proven the reliability of the SC kit by drving one, not because i have a 1989 thunderbird SC that was a DD and still running strong, so therefore the CT kit will last just as long. thats just a had comparison.... unless he has a turbo TL he's been DDing and hiding the last 2-3 years, he can only assume its reliability.


anyways, did you read my last post?? since IHC's stuck on the whole tuning thing, i mentioned lets pretend CT made the kit complete, so we can move on with new arguements.

 

^^ yeah my first post was a bit late after u said about pretending the kit was "complete". I know this is completely irrelevant to this thread, but i was thinking about getting 92-95 civic hatch and dropping the j32a2 from cl-s. i love the look of the j-series in the civic hatches, maybe even supercharge it then too lol i would be in the 10's with that setup and the lightweight civic hatch. again the irrelavance is uneccesary but couldn't help but think out loud sorry.

 

^ after all we need a little break from all the heavy debate going on in this thread.

 

that would be a fun little project for sure


sounds good

 

I don't give a shit about either one. When I spend 8 grand it will be on a new car or my house.

 

haha^^ i agree with u bud . but not to knitpick but i'm pretty sure the turbo kit is 6k not 8k.

 

haa haa... love those type of sentences.
No offense but, you smell like feces

 

j series EM1 was an idea i had but for some reason im leaning towards a K24/K20 ITR.... just have to find the money for it.... S/C j-series hatch would be sick

 

Both cars use internal combustion engines. Both use turbos. Both have the same tuning requirements to make them last. What is relevant to the GN is relevant to the TL, all the major points at least. They are more similar than different. There is nothing difficult here. Like I said, I predicted the Tl would hold 450hp at the wheels with a good tune and it does. I predicted the hp and at what boost level after looking at head flow 6 months before it happened and I was within 20hp. it's easy math no matter what brand of car you're talking about. It's nothing special, just metal.

Like I said I've been heavily involved in the Ford modular engines and forced induction both turbo and factory supercharged and I've done some small displacement stuff too. The GN is my DD street car, I've built and driven some 900hp streetable Mustangs. The difference here is I'm an engine builder. I've been lucky enough to work with one of the Ford engineers and some very knowledgable people that make me look dumb. I don't just sell stuff or install kits.

Again, I'm not stuck on GNs and I fully admit the TL makes much more power at the same boost level. It took 26psi and race gas on the stock engine back in the old days to match what the TL does on 7psi and pump gas. I would love to see a TL make more hp than me, maybe it would push me to install the built engine I have sitting here.

I too blew stuff up at the 400hp level due to a bad tune. That's why I know what works and what doesn't work. It's reliable at over 600rwhp and the only thing that's changed is the tuning.

You make this sound so difficult but it's very easy. Take detonation out of the equation and ANY FI engine will live a long life at high hp levels.

It comes down to this. If it's properly tuned it's going to be reliable engine wise at this power level period. I try not to talk down to people or sound arrogant but some of you are stuck in these arguments that were solved many many years ago. Some of the things posted in this thread make me laugh. If you guys would like to continue these stone-age conversations among yourselves I'll bow out right now. In a few years you might realize I know what I'm talking about.

 

Actually I love the idea of a large/turbo engine in a light car. So many positives, very little negatives. The light car will be easier on parts, launch harder, quicker, and a hundred other positives.

 

yeah i know. i mean i've research a little about the cost and for about 4k one can have a j-series with 6-speed installed in a civic hatch eg, with 240whp/220torque, compared that to a k-series drop that costs about roughly 10k and gives about 215whp/190torque and u will certainly go j-series.
i think the only problem most civic tuner don't realize is there is a tunable solution, the fic.while searching through other civic forums nobody seems to know a thing about the fic with the j-series. they all think the j-series is too much work and doesn't have enough potential rofl. but wait till we start pushing big numbers with turbo's and such and they will recognize.
i love how light the 92-95 civic hatch is. for those that don't know their curb weight is roughly 2080lbs, and with a stock j-series engine swap they are running low 12's. i gutted out my whole car and weight 2750lbs, and yet would love to feel the j-series in the civic's 2000lb chassis.

sorry for the rambling, kinda lost track .

 

i know exactly what you mean. I just dont have the funds for it right now. Besides my uncle sold the 89 supra but picked up and 93 mr2. Hopefully he sends it to the US, so i can mess with it for a while.

 

...

as the world turns it seems.

Look, I only been around the block a few times... but at least I been around the block. I'm a systems engineer, integrator,... hell management puke now... but I do read, and I do bust knuckles.
Xiomaru and tenzing, you guys are doing the right thing in your internet research, but aligning your arguments based on that, and an unproven prototype turbo, and the weakness of those arguments... is all I've ever used to comment on. I've poked at Xiomaro for his highly knowledgeable and boastful posts, which clearly he appears to enjoy. No doubt he's knowledgeable in his own right, I can only comment on what I've seen.

IHC has vast expereince in this domain. I've never doubted that. I have some tinker time, as does 04accord... but I'll never admit to being an expert here... just "seasoned".
Outside of that, i've wasted many hours here in this forum over the passed 3+ years "keeping up" with the TL power forum. Some of my data may not be based on TL wrench time (most is) or engine building, but much is based on attentively paying attention to this community for a long time, which is equally valuable... The AZ 3GTL historian if you will.

04accord and I are in sync on a few key points... and IHC refuses to acknowledge the technical hurdle that plagues this arguement... The complications of tuning on the TL platform. The answer of "just get it tuned" is an echo here.

The CTSC was released LITERALLY 5 years ago (that's along time in technology evolution years) with a piggyback ACM soluton, that IHC feels was inadequete. I disagree, it may not be ideal, but I certainly do not feel it was as criminal and vile as IHC's public disgust articulates. The "kit" is as complete and bolt-on simple, documented, and supported as any I've ever seen. After a few years of fielded use, the tuning shortcomings emerged, and a few engines popped. Most, if not all, from pushing a risky tuning solution over the edge with further engine tweaking.

Perhaps CT should have been more forthcoming in the risks. Debateable. The kit has proven itself reliable in sales volume, albeit "detuned", to make it so. You're making a NA car FI with a bolt on kit... The inherint risks should be self evident... and bolting it on, and running long redlines will eventually work it's magic on the motor. That kit, by design, is not oriented for track use, it's a street car setup... Let us not forget that, and recall CT never sold it as a kit for such an endeavor. Track days are fun with it, but taking even a stock NA TL to the track and flogging to redline over an over has risks.
I hope the Turbo TL receives such documented testing.

5 years have elapsed, and ONLY NOW are tuning solutions emerging for the TL. A few threads down, there's a nice thread going concerning the AEM F/IC on a CTSC and that it has issues in the closed loop portion of the engine management program... STILL... Not sure what 04accord is doing about this, or what the Turbo kit engineers are doing about this, but that apparently it is still an issue witht the FIC... (and sounds like it will be solved with a piggyback on a piggyback, ugh)...

This again spells out my 1st point on all these threads. Cracking the TL tuning requires specials skillsets to which most locales don't have, even today. Even if the F/IC works out fully, finding someone that can set it up will be a challenge for the national market... This applies to the turbo too. The ACM, as awful as IHC has defined the primitive nature of the tuning, was a viable way to get something workable to a commnity that wanted it, and minimize the risks through keeping the gains minimal. I find that a very salient business tradeoff.

Hondata (one of the industry wide recognized tuners) tried tuning too right?, we never got a straight answer if it was failure or success. USSI seemed happy, but pulled the SC. It never came to market, I consider that a sign of failure. Perhaps the complexity, and market projections were issues here. I can only speculate. The fact no other solution ever merged is a telling trend.

IHC continues to belabor the "complete kit" paradigm by paralleling the issue to developing on an older GN platform where the primary constraint has already been negotiated... The tuning/engine management. Had Honda not provided such an interesting tuning challenge, we would likely already have multiple turbo/SC options, and CTSC ACM tuning would have been "more desirable"...

"There is nothing difficult here", "it's only metal"... In concept. It's actually the electronic that defy us. Manifolds, turbo's, blowers... all the easy part.
Apparently it's quite difficult as CTSC, Hondata, AEM, JandR, Paul, and few others have all tried and it's still being worked. Pulling 450 HP on one dyno is hardly a sign of reliability, just a sign of a lot of fuel and a lot of air. Time will tell the rest.

I'm interested in hearing more in the HOW the tuning is being addresed in both cases frankly, as opposed to "gimme a base map"... because figuring this out is the lynchpin to all FI development options.

Now...
Shit, I'm rambling.

 

Kennedy, you have said the proper and right things. All of you need to calm down and refrain from bashing each other and cutting each other down. Stick to the facts. The next one to jump out of line will get a vacation.

Just to add my , any car can be reliable or a POS depending on how it's treated and what tuning goes into it. With all the TL's data systems, tuning it is very hard. Comptech figured out a way to "duct tape and superglue" a tuning method. Did it work, yes, did it work well, not for longevity.

The Kit was designed for occasional use and not for use every single day at redline. IMHO, the kit is incomplete if you want to race your TL everyday or if you like to push it hard. You'll need some sort of external tune in order to make it much more reliable. If you plan on getting the car to redline maybe once or twice a month, it shouldn't be a problem in stock form; however it begs the question why spend 5K on it.

 

To be accurate, many push there CTSC hard, but on the street, that's only for literally seconds at a time, as IHC defined above in MichealBenz driving style. I run to redline often, it's hard not to.

IHC's assertion is that the issue is run full throttle for 10 minutes and see what happens. I see this point, but will never test this condition, not an issue for a street car, and where the greyness of reliability comes in. I'm ot sure I'd be comfortable pushing my TL in stockform that hard. I have too much mechanical sympathy, and loathe driveway repair. (no lift in my garage).

I recall 03TL-S's story of throwing a rod with the CTSC 110 mph sustained street race. Uncertain if the CTSC was implicated, but likely detonation resulting in a catstropic rod failure. The J32 uses heuretic (sp?) rods (weaker casts)- The TL-S uses stronger forged rods.
Someone correct me if I'm wrong. I belive it was IHC that brought this to light, there was even a Honda TSB stating this issue as a sign of "aftermarket perfromance accesories".

Why would you spend $5K on it? It's been the only way to break over 300 HP in a TL... The only equivalent was to gut your car to the frame.

 

As I said I'm presenting the other side of the story. Everyone has been CT-E supercharger kit bash-happy in the past 6 months. I don't understand how 120+ supercharged TL's lasted all these years and then in the last 6 months the kit is blowing motors up.

I'm excited to see the turbo kit on the market but it has not proved its reliability. It's too premature to say that.

I already said that a turbocharged car is more efficient than a supercharged car but honestly that is also changing. We were just at a conference last week at APR Tuned, which does a lot of VW/Audi/Porsche hardware and software and they have supercharged the new B8 RS4 4.2L with a new Eaton supercharger:

http://www.eaton.com/EatonCom/Produc...M112/index.htm

This new blower is extremely efficient and only robs 5 hp or less while cruising.

Also the centrifugal superchargers are beginning to compete with turbos on many levels.

 

Oh yes, just one more thing:

I asked Nate from CT-E (one of the owners) about the TL kit and the issues that are being raised. He said that not a single motor (J-series, F-series, K-Series) has blown from any of their kits in stock form at any time.

 

That's the best summary I've heard yet. Like I said, the turbo would be blowing stuff too (probably quicker) if it had the same lack of tuning.

This thing has been turned into a blower vs turbo debate when it should be a proper engine management vs stone age management.

Kennedy- My reference to "it's all just metal" was to others' acting like the TL's ability to handle or not handle hp was this mystical thing. After a while you can pretty much look at a set of pistons, rods, block, crank, and the material they're made of/way they're made, and estimate closely how much power they will take.

I know you think in a very logical manner and you have a good grasp on these things, more logical than me. But I've been around the block too many times to let certain things that have been said go and that includes people saying blowers are more reliable and that the management is fine out of the box. There is a good tuning option out there now.

Now when we start getting into ultimate power levels, pushing the stock internals to the limit on a good tune, the turbo is going to make more power period just due to the fact the 40hp or so it takes to drive the blower is going to the wheels instead.

Just think about that for a second. You guys question the turbo kit at what, 380-420whp but say the blower is reliable at 340hp. You do realize the blower cars that are making 340hp at the wheels are actually making 380hp at the crank before the blower zaps it up. Or said another way, the turbo car at 380whp is putting the same stress on the engine as the blower car at 340whp.

 

^^ sadly, that is the case. 5k for the SC kit, (4200new + 800 to complete) but this is somethnig we all have to consider...

when first released, comptech advertised gaining 50-60hp with the SC and people jumped on it of course, since it was the only thing available at the time. thats 1hp per $100 spent (approx)

NOW, for that additional $800, you gain a whopping 40+hp which just about doubles the hp to $ ratio and strengthens the reliability to boot.. this makes the kit much more desirable, and shows weve made some great strides in the last year or so.

then you throw this turbo kit in the mix, and i'd say we progressed nicely

 

^ yup all true and then some.

 

What no one seems to address is that at redline or even going wide open in 1-4 gear you are picking up speed at a extream rate and can hit almost 140 mph at redline in 4th. So this beggs the question where are you abel to do this without crashing or getting arrested? I rarely go to redline because the car makes alot of power from 4k up and it is just not needed.

 

nono: funny thing is Nate wouldn't even know!!! its not like he keeps tabs on every kit he sells, let alone is told if a motor was blown. i agreed with ur post before this one, but could not let this one slide. there is no need to lie in this thread, just to promote/protect a brands reputation. if nate was smarter he would have put more r&D into engine management before he sold the kit. sorry but ur last post just was unecessary information, and i couldn't let newbies uneducated reading this believe that statement just cause the manufacturer said so. we are here to debate pro/cons of both kits, not listen to statements that have no validity. my

 

when i said this-->"if nate was smarter he would have put more r&D into engine management before he sold the kit." i was referring to the j-series kit

 

Agreed.

 

That's a good point and I think that's how most people drive the supercharged TL and that's how they get away with it without blowing up.

 

That I agree with.

 

I just typed out a 2 page rant on this... the goddm forum logged me out and ate it when I posted. pissed.
Summary:

This is a dumb and ignorant statement. 5 years later the Pro's AND Community are still working on a thorough and repeatable tuning solution... and we're still not there, but getting close.

In 18 months of the TL's release, CTE kicked this kit out. That's a respectable feat.

5 years later, noone has released a competitive product.

4 + 1 testing year later, and with all these lessons learned, JandR has a prototype. This is complicated problem.

The CTSC for the TL was the largest R&D investment CTE has made in a kit, for a high risk market (big heavy 4 door sedan), they still did it...

CT-E is a great company with great product... Period. There wasn't a TL on this forum that didn't have thier swaybar and short shift kit in 2005.

Respect the development companies that support your platform, or you'll be in the metal shop milling shit out yourself.

 

How do you respect a company that released an incomplete $5,000 "kit" that turns your TL into a ticking timebomb just to turn a quick buck? If they were respectable they would've waited until there was a tuning solution to release it.

The J&R kit has already been shipped to customers, it's beyond the prototype stage, it's in production. No engine failures. Tuning is complete.

The TL was not a high risk investment. As people in the Domestic world know, the import crowd will pay insane amounts of money for crap as long as it has good marketing.

I don't know where the R&D came from. They physically adapted the supercharger to fit the TL which is as basic as it gets. Crush the fuel pressure regulator.... I barely remember that stuff in the '80s when we learned better. And install some basic electronics that had been around forever. Where's the money at?

I know what these parts go for wholesale and I can tell you right now that the turbo kit has a MUCH lower profit margin.

Lets compare:

Turbo- The best of the best PTE61 dual ball bearing with a ported compressor housing and plenty of headroom for those that want to push the boost and powerlevels. I've run well into the 20psi range on this turbo on a friend's GN. It's not breaking a sweat on the TL.
Supercharger- Undersized for all but stock boost on the 3.2. Not a deal breaker, after all it's meant to be run in kit form but they left no room for modification.
Powerband- The turbo blows it away in low end torque and high end power. More power everywhere on the tach.
Intercooler- Even though the turbo has a cooler discharge temp it uses an intercooler. It might've taken away from Comptech's huge profit margin to include the intercooler and we wouldn't want to increase reliability at the cost of profit, right?
Tune- Different leagues, the #1 reason the turbo kit kills the supercharger kit out of the box.


Lets not forget the turbo kit includes injectors, I believe a fuel pump, top of the line BOV, top of the line wastegate, good tuning, and an intercooler so let's not compare prices anymore, k? This kit will support 600whp.

And lets keep in mind I'm not affiliated with J&R, I don't profit from promoting anything. I'm just interested in putting the correct info out there for people trying to make a choice.

I do highly recommend the supercharger kit as long as something is done about the out of the box tune. 300+whp is more than enough for most people. Again, I don't want to put the blower or the people that purchased it down. I would run one if I had the money to spend but I plan on getting back into racing by the end of the year so the money won't be spent on the TL.

 

aww man ihc u beat me to respond. ^^ everything u said i agree ihc, i couldn't have worded it better myself. but anyway, kennedy listen man THE 18 MONTHS it took to release a supercharge/turbocharger kits is not a "GOOD FEAT". 1st the tl/accord j-series is not a popular modifying platform so there was no need for the supercharger to be released so quickly, and so poorly. 2nd yeah the tl turbo is now in "PRODUCTION". 3RD, i respect developmental companies, however i don't take kindly to companies that "half-ass" crap, then some blown engines later claim NONE OF THIER kits blew any engines ever. ROFL LOL. CT has dissapointed me with thier kit and thier wild claims having no validity. amen

 

1. If someone blew up their motor with a CT-E kit you don't think that they would be on the phone with CT-E complaining? It's naive to think CT-E wouldn't know if their product caused an issue. People call me, and I'm not the manufacturer, about insignificant issues; I'm sure a blown motor would warrant a call to CT-E.

2. I don't need to lie to make sales. I have lived my life as an honest person and I run my business the same way. For you to assert that I am a liar is a brazen statement and an unnecessary personal attack and professional attack of my business. If you are questioning CT-E's reliability and statements call them up and tell them so (assuming you have a CT-E product). But I'll not stand for attacks directed at us.