Paxton vs Roe vs Twin Turbo

[Zan186]

Quetion is are all three of these considered to be bolt on without major modification's?
I know Roe is just a bolt on system.
Is the Paxton a simple bolt on as well? What are the benefits of the Paxton over the Roe and vice versa.

Is their a Twin Turbo system that is considered a bolt on? I don't want to do any major cutting or major changes to the car.

I have read a ton of information on this site but I haven't really read much on the Paxton.
Tator seems to favor the Roe, but I would like to hear the pro's and con's of each.

[Kevin D]

First off, what year/gen viper do you have?

[Zan186]

Just bought a 2002 FE, but it had the engine sent to Aero and Zero'ed. It now has Forged pistons, 708 lumpy cam, new roller rockers and a Vec 2 with Elderbrock headers and Corsa Exhaust.

[Kevin D]

Good stuff, that reworked motor of yours should be good for huge HP (900+) easy with the right blower set-up...even more turbocharged...


Roe Blower; - Pro's = Great quality, good customer service, direct bolt-on that's entirely reversible. Really clean and OEM looking power adder. Under $8K installed and tuned**

- Con's = Efficient positive displacement style blower till about 6.5-to-8PSI (or around 600-to-650RWHP) then efficiency drops like a rock** Non-intercooled (need meth injection for higher boost pulley's), wining sound under boost (which some find annoying)

Conclusion = In my opinion if all you're looking for is between ~550-to-650RWHP it's the best solution. It's efficient, instant full boost from low rpms to redline, direct bolt-on, easy to tune and clean looking.

-------------------------------------------------------------------

Paxton Supercharger; - Pro's = Lot's of horsepower potential (well over 900RWHP from it's Novi 2000 head unit), relatively quiet S/C'er, linear power delivery which helps with "street" traction, intercooled** Also reasonably priced at under $9K installed and tuned.

- Con's = Air-to-water intercooler undersized and not efficient enough to support over 700RWHP or being runned back-to-back without being heat soaked (this can be addressed), split-second engine management unit garbage for tuning (VEC II much better), blower placement is in front of the motor and front axle which "could" affect handling.

Conclusion = The most bang for the buck in the relm of "F/I" if well OVER 700RWHP is what you're looking for.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Turbocharging; - Pro's = The best F/I solution period. Efficient, intercooled, and more horsepower potential than any tire in production could ever handle.

- Con's = Money $$$. It's generally the most expensive F/I solution of the three and is not a direct bolt-on.

Conclusion = If money is no object I wouldn't hesitate to turbocharge !


...hope this helped ;-))

[Bobpantax]

Look at post entitled "How much longer for the Gen III Roes SC?" in the SRT Forum. It contains some detailed data comparing the two systems. Their power curves are different. I have had both. For every day driveability the STOCK Paxton application is better. Once you go beyond the stock application, things get a bit more complicated. As Sean noted in his post, his Gen I and Gen II Roe kits have certain fuel management issues regarding the rear running richer than the front cylinders. In fact he mentioned retrofitting the Gen I and Gen II kits in his post. On the other hand, I found the eccentricities of his kit manageable and tolerable and nothing beats the looks of the Gen I and II kits on top of the engine. There is an old post dedicated to photos of same. Many of the photos are the equivalent of gearhead porno.

[GTS Bruce]

Another paxton con.Removing the upper side to side frame stiffening tube. GTS Bruce

[InjectTheVenom]

Another Roe pro: if your hands can work magic you can even slap it on a 1:43 Viper, just look in my gallery for the pics

[Kevin D]

...As Sean noted in his post, his Gen I and Gen II Roe kits have certain fuel management issues regarding the rear running richer than the front cylinders. In fact he mentioned retrofitting the Gen I and Gen II kits in his post...

Had Roe ever addressed this in the Gen II kits...or are they still sold with this issue?? Thanks.

[Bobpantax]

Had Roe ever addressed this in the Gen II kits...or are they still sold with this issue?? Thanks.

Since Sean just posted what I quoted a couple of days ago, the kits for both the Gen I and Gen II Vipers would appear to currently have the issue. However, you should email or call Sean to confirm.

[KenH]

The new Gen I/II kits have slightly different intake manifolds and VEC2 firmware that pretty much takes care of the fuel distribution problem. I think Sean was actually referencing the Gen 3 truck kit which had a similar or worse problem that caused him to drop the kit before production.

[Bobpantax]

"That’s why our truck kit did not end up being produced with the “sidewinder” version I built for one guy. I just wasn’t happy with the front cylinders running leaner and the rears richer. Went through that enough on the Gen1 and Gen2 kits, which I plan to go back and retro fit with improvements."

The above is the actual wording used by Sean. The last sentence is clearly referring to the Gen I and Gen II Viper units. If I am not mistaken, my GTS had the newer intake. The 8lb sytem was put on in early 2005. I still had the rich condition in the rear and the number ten spark plug had to be changed more frequently. But it was still alot of fun even with some of its eccentricities.

If you do not mind the warm up period jerkiness; the need to change cards under certain conditions; the richness issue with the attendant need to change plugs more frequently; and, the lack of an intercooler or, in the alternative the need to refill the water/meth unit depending on the amount the vehicle is driven; and, you want an incredibly good looking application and massive torque starting at 1800 RPM, go for the Roe. Also, as I mentioned elsewhere, the Roe requires more air flow than the stock cats allow to function well. With high flow cats and a Roe, a Gen II Viper is loud enough to scare off the dead. Lastly, if you like listening to AM talk radio,you might find that AM reception is impaired and that there is no way to remedy same.

[Joseph Dell]

The #10 plug issue happened with the non-firmware-updated VEC2's that were both N/A and SC. In fact, I had both N/A and paxton SC'd cars have that issue. but the firmware fixed it.

Not to ding any particular tuner or vendor, but i find it to often be the case that there is up-sell of parts when power-adders are involved. and we, as power junkies, figure "oh, while i'm there, i'll just add the headers, port the heads, exhaust, throttle-bodies, clutch, roll-bar, half-shafts, tranny, etc..." you get the idea. "what else do i need". And the answer is lots!

But product vendors will always tell you that you need more stuff. Almost as much as tuners will always say "there is more left in that car" when they tune it. I've even had vendors try to sell me one thing over another just because they either a) have more inventory that week or b) make more $$ selling the different part.

But back to our story...

I had a 700rwhp paxton car with STOCK headers, STOCK cats, STOCK throttle bodies... and it ran like a dream. Adding TB's showed no HP gain. The car was bone stock EXCEPT for rocker arms and a borla cat-back. 700rwhp and 700tq.

Anyway, my point is that all cars with more air IN will run better with more air OUT. but a paxton flows more CFM than a ROE, so something doesn't add up.

One can easily spend lots and lots of $$$ on parts... But I like AM radio. They don't broadcast hockey on FM around here.

JD

[Bobpantax]

Hi JD. The following are from Sean's web page in the FAQ section regarding the supercharger kit for Gen I and Gen II. You raise an interesting point about the air flow. It appears that the Roe system could work with the stock cats but excessive heat generated by the stock cats in this air/fuel environment would cause "damage to nearby components" based on Sean's FAQ answers. Perhaps someone will jump in and explain why the stock Paxton kit works perfectly with stock cats.

"What modifications or upgrades do you recommend with the Supercharger?

We recommend smooth tubes, high flow air filters, no cats (or high flow cats at the least), a new fuel filter and a good set of spark plug wires for best results. Beyond that, it depends on how much power you want to make."

"Is the Supercharger emissions certified?

No."

"Will the stock catalytic converters be ok?

The stock cats have 4 substrates and are designed for the stock car. With higher exhaust volume and richer air/ fuel ratios, they can overheat causing heat damage to nearby components. We recommend no cats or high flow cats."

[kwkshift]

Anyway, my point is that all cars with more air IN will run better with more air OUT. but a paxton flows more CFM than a ROE, so something doesn't add up.

JD

Power under the curve. A centrifugal car may make more peak power, but a roots or screw car will make more average power. So, it's very possible for a "700 rwhp car" to lose a race to a "600 rwhp car."

[Zan186]

Is'nt their an SVS Turbo that is considered a bolt on? Aka no extra modifications needed?