View Poll Results: MOST RELIABLE/DURABLE/EFFICIENT FORCED INDUCTION (SUPER CHARGER/TURBO CHARGER) FOR 3.6
PRODIGY TURBO CHARGER
0
0%
Voters: 32. You may not vote on this poll
Most reliable/durable/efficient supercharger for 3.6 pentastar
05-18-2016, 11:37 AM
#91
JK Freak
Thread Starter
This poll is nothing more than a popularity contest. Reliability/Durability: No one has performed any objective tests to determine any measure of these, let alone a standard measure that can be compared between the options. Any claims of one option being overall, as an entire system, more reliable/durable than another option, are based on conjecture and broad generalizations. Efficiency: Of what? With respect to what? "Efficiency" by itself doesn't mean anything. Efficiency of fuel consumption with respect to distance travelled (mpg)? Efficiency of net power/torque produced with respect to boost pressure? Efficiency of full throttle net power/torque produced with respect to fuel consumption? Or something else? FWIW, nothing beats a turbo in terms of minimal parasitic loss, maximum gains for a given boost level. Fuel economy efficiency is impossible to make strong claims about without controlled tests, but customers often report an increase of a few MPG after installing a turbo. When installing the Stage 1 turbo, I personally observed an increase in MPG on my own vehicle that made up for the increased cost of premium fuel. I basically broke even on the cost of fuel per mile compared to stock, despite requiring premium fuel instead of regular. But this is just anecdotal evidence, YMMV depending on many factors, and it's impossible to make valid comparisons between different FI kits with respect to MPG because different people drive differently, have wildly different modifications to Jeeps that affect fuel economy (more than probably any other type of common vehicle out there). Moral of the story: a comparison of FI kits on the market cannot be distilled down to a simple "which one is the best?" public poll. They all have a different balance of advantages/disadvantages, strengths/weaknesses, in many different areas. It depends on many things like: * How do you drive your Jeep? Hardcore low-speed technical rock-crawling, off-road toy, trailered to the trail? Daily driver mall crawler only? Weekend warrior that is daily driven on the streets and driven on highways/freeways to get to moderate difficulty off-road destinations? Somewhere in between? * What do you want? Respectable power? "Holy crap this is fast!", shove-you-into-your-seat-power? What particular situations are you wishing you had more power for? Is maximum low RPM gains with instant throttle response a major priority? Is it really a priority based on how you use your Jeep, or do you just assume it should be a priority because it's a Jeep and everyone says low end torque is what really matters? How does that balance out with your priority for improving acceleration on the street (freeway on-ramps, passing performance, etc) where mid-upper RPM range torque/power is what really matters? Is there a particular forced induction technology that just fascinates you, makes the noises you really like, and you just have to have it? * What's your budget, how strict is it, and what's your ability to decide to wait longer to save up more to make a more expensive option affordable? Does your budget absolutely rule out more expensive options (makes it easy to narrow down the list of options)? Everyone has a different balance of these and much more. The goal is to find the option whose advantages/strengths best macth your balance of desires/priorities. A major problem encountered while trying to compare options is trying to figure out how much gains each option has relative to the others, and exactly how the gains are distributed throughout the RPM range relative to the others. Some manufacturers have not published straightforward dyno chart results. Those that do publish dyno charts with before/after results for comparison all have different baseline stock results (due to different dyno types/models, different dyno configurations for doing power pulls, etc). None of the results can be directly compared to other manufacturers' results. I'm working on a solution to this problem. I hope to have something finalized to present/explain within a couple weeks 
~Jeff
~JeffI started the poll to help make a decision and since there are no scientific studies out there comparing them all, I asked as many owners of bolt-on forced induction as possible on as many forums as possible. The goal was not to mount a scientific study, though I would if I was independently wealthy and had more time on my hands.
I actually came very close to purchasing the Prodigy Stage II and I am still a big fan. Since I have stock ride height JKUR, and wanted to keep it that way, I passed. As much as I like Prodigy's turbo kit, I feel good/lucky to have spent a fraction of the cost on a used Magnuson, and not having to mess with the exhaust system.
Moderators feel free to delete this thread if you see fit. Wish that I could have gotten more real data; no doubt many of those who voted on the poll have no experience with the FI kits.
05-18-2016, 12:28 PM
#92
Former Vendor
If you picked the right option for you and your circumstances, and you are happy with it, then that's all that matters. It's hard to pass up a good deal. If cost didn't matter, then everyone interested in performance gains would have a Hellcat engine in their Jeep!
Nah. It's still a worthwhile thread with useful info. It's only the poll results that don't really mean anything.
For things like reliability/durability, I don't think there will ever be clear/objective/comparable information. The best you can do is look for a clear pattern of people reporting issues. You're very unlikely to find such patterns just because of the relatively small market for FI kits for Wranglers compared to something like the Wrangler itself, and the fact that a majority of FI kit owners probably aren't even active on forums. It would be also be very difficult to design a "scientific" study to determine a measure of reliability/durability. You would basically need the resources of a major car manufacturer to test millions of customer-equivalent miles of driving in all conditions, etc., to shake out any issues that may arise and compare failure rates between he different options.
I think it's fairly safe to assume that all of the options on the market are pretty reliable/durable in that they won't make your engine blow up, and you should feel confident in relying on the vehicle as a daily driver and taking it on long trips. None of the manufacturers want their kits to fail on customer vehicles. It's a lose-lose situation for everyone involved if that happens, so none of the kits are designed to push the power to the ragged edges of reliability like what might be done on a race vehicle where they don't mind rebuilding the engine occasionally.
But I agree that there is still a lack of good comparable data in areas that are objective and measurable, like the relative performance gains between different FI options, and the distribution of those gains throughout the RPM range (not focusing on peak gains only). That seems like such a basic aspect of a performance modification that SHOULD be easy to compare. Enough data exists already to make the comparisons, but it takes some work to gather all the data and process it into something that can be compared.
~Jeff
07-04-2016, 07:49 PM
#93
JK Enthusiast
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Santa Clara, CA
Posts: 292
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Having finished my install yesterday, I can't comment on durability and efficiency topics. I went with the Edelbrock kit after reading a lot online and deciding it was the kit that fits my needs best.
To Edelbrock's credit, the kit was complete and the picture book instructions clear and detailed. The two steps where I deviated were removing clips from the injectors so they'd fit into the fuel rails and splicing the PCV hose onto the OEM hard tube per a friend's tip. The included air filter was too long thus required trimming to get the airbox to close, otherwise everything was a perfect fit.
Took me ~20 hours from opening the hood to recycling the boxes. I was bagging and tagging and labeling everything, plus double checking every step, which slowed me down considerably. I could shave off 4-6 hours now with experience and a few better tools. It fired up the first time with no error codes or leaks, so the method was a success.
Seat of the pants feel is it's obviously faster, however I haven't romped on the throttle yet. MPG is 12-13, but I think it'll improve as the computer adjusts over the next few days.
To Edelbrock's credit, the kit was complete and the picture book instructions clear and detailed. The two steps where I deviated were removing clips from the injectors so they'd fit into the fuel rails and splicing the PCV hose onto the OEM hard tube per a friend's tip. The included air filter was too long thus required trimming to get the airbox to close, otherwise everything was a perfect fit.
Took me ~20 hours from opening the hood to recycling the boxes. I was bagging and tagging and labeling everything, plus double checking every step, which slowed me down considerably. I could shave off 4-6 hours now with experience and a few better tools. It fired up the first time with no error codes or leaks, so the method was a success.
Seat of the pants feel is it's obviously faster, however I haven't romped on the throttle yet. MPG is 12-13, but I think it'll improve as the computer adjusts over the next few days.