Roe vs Paxton superchargers

For me I just want some grunt for cruising around town, plus it will be at least a year or two before I go FI. Thats why I am leaning towards Roe. After being in Scotts truck I can validate that the Paxton is awesome. But I am thinking about buying a high mileage Viper or couple year old Vette and going with a Paxton on that. If I want top end speed I think a 2000 pound diet is in order. Mike's truck is a beast, but it is still difficult to overcome all that weight. my .02, which is worth more like .01 cuz I have neither blower!!
 
ViperTruck2933 said:
I'm not gonna be popular for this opinion...but

There are still (obviously) issues to be worked out with the Roe. I don't think anyone has busted 12.5 in the 1/4 with one yet. 1FAST's run doesn't count, IMHO. He did not have the same unit that everyone else has.

Someone with the Roe needs to do some testing and find a set of rear gears and a tire heigth that will match up with the torque level you are seeing down low. I don't think 4.56s make a good combination with that system (as evidenced by all the timeslips posted to this point).

Until the traction issue gets worked out and some decent times posted with the Roe, the Paxton is king of the huffers....IMHO. :dontknow:
Click to expand...

Tim, your truck is an interesting build. With the engine mods you did, how does the pricing of them compare to going the FI route?

patrick
 
mauiSRT/10 said:
Tim, your truck is an interesting build. With the engine mods you did, how does the pricing of them compare to going the FI route?

patrick
Click to expand...
On a bone stock truck it would probably take about $8K to get where I am. But the best part of a N/A build is that you can do it in steps and not be out $8K all at once.

I did Headers, exhaust and CAI first. Then I bought all of my parts over time (VEC 2, cam, pushrods, gaskets, rockers, etc..). Then I took the truck and all the parts to PBJ for the install and pretty much just had to pay the labor and tuning. There were a few small components in the heads (vlaves, springs) that came on the final bill but not too much.

The N/A truck is a very different animal than the Paxton truck. The drive and feel are alot different. The N/A feels alot more peppy and responsive. It also pulls like a freight train down low & screams up top, whereas the Paxton feels more normal down low pulls real hard up in the top of the gears.

I've driven mine and Bills (neighbor) both and they just pull different.:dontknow:
 
I've only had the truck a few days and just love the whine you get with the Paxton. I think its pretty cool, and you could just hear there is something different about the truck it sounds like you got a small turbine under the hood. The other thing to is that drivetrain doesn't suffer as much with the Paxton because the power comes on gradually as the engine spools the SC, but on the Roe the power is there as soon as you get on it. Each system has its pros and cons you're just going to have to sit down, and figure out which one would work best for you. Also another factor would be which one is the your tuner comfortable with. As far an install I think the Roe would be an easier install.

Oh I almost forgot make sure you have a budget for tires. I've only had this a few days, and I already need a new set of rears :burnout: :D
 
The reason I went with the Roe was based on that I seldom if ever plan to race the truck. My thinking was that the low end torque, or rather, flat torque curve, would be a better fit for my driving style than the sweet spot at the top end.

For a street machine there are some advantages of having the power at hand at any rpm instead of having to reach for it. I think it is a misconception that added torque will automatically translate into loss of traction, spinning the tires is easier to avoid than many would think. One of the nice things about having the torque is being able to quickly accelerate from coasting speeds to get around slow drivers or just to gain speed quickly without having to downshift, it is nice to step on it at 2000rpm and get to 4000 rpm in a flash.

As far as running out of breath at higher rpm's, I hear the Paxton will pick up where the Roe starts choking, however in my case the governor will stop the show before the motor even gets to that point. I have never felt my SC running out of steam at the top end, the quickness with which the truck gets to high speeds during a highway pass is just scary. If you're cruising and downshift to 3000rpm for a quick pass, you will sink into the seat and will be doing 120 before you realize it, the transition from 3000 to 6000 happens in an instant.


I never rode in a Paxton equipped truck, but I can see how the milder bottom end torque and peaky horsepower curve would make it a more suitable strip machine, no power wasted out of the hole and you shift to keep it running around the sweet spot. I can imagine how it would be a rush to feel the torque curve increase as the truck speed climbs, also it has to be great fun shifting around the powerband.

In the original post I was really looking to compare performance of two stock trucks with a basic SC upgrade, driven under the same conditions, and possibly by the same driver. I really did not intend to establish product superiority, but maybe looking for reports from people who have experience with both setups under a variety of conditions. That way people can make a choice based on which conditions they want their truck to perform better on.

Also, I just love to read about the subject and what everyone has to say about their own experience with their own setup, I guess that was the underlyinng reason for the post :D
 
The Nationals should be a treat! Lots of Paxsons, lots of Roe TSTM.

Don't miss this year!

I may get my truck out of the 14's! If I can find someone else to drive it...
 
SRT-MIKE said:
The reason I went with the Roe was based on that I seldom if ever plan to race the truck. My thinking was that the low end torque, or rather, flat torque curve, would be a better fit for my driving style than the sweet spot at the top end.

For a street machine there are some advantages of having the power at hand at any rpm instead of having to reach for it. I think it is a misconception that added torque will automatically translate into loss of traction, spinning the tires is easier to avoid than many would think. One of the nice things about having the torque is being able to quickly accelerate from coasting speeds to get around slow drivers or just to gain speed quickly without having to downshift, it is nice to step on it at 2000rpm and get to 4000 rpm in a flash.

As far as running out of breath at higher rpm's, I hear the Paxton will pick up where the Roe starts choking, however in my case the governor will stop the show before the motor even gets to that point. I have never felt my SC running out of steam at the top end, the quickness with which the truck gets to high speeds during a highway pass is just scary. If you're cruising and downshift to 3000rpm for a quick pass, you will sink into the seat and will be doing 120 before you realize it, the transition from 3000 to 6000 happens in an instant.


I never rode in a Paxton equipped truck, but I can see how the milder bottom end torque and peaky horsepower curve would make it a more suitable strip machine, no power wasted out of the hole and you shift to keep it running around the sweet spot. I can imagine how it would be a rush to feel the torque curve increase as the truck speed climbs, also it has to be great fun shifting around the powerband.

In the original post I was really looking to compare performance of two stock trucks with a basic SC upgrade, driven under the same conditions, and possibly by the same driver. I really did not intend to establish product superiority, but maybe looking for reports from people who have experience with both setups under a variety of conditions. That way people can make a choice based on which conditions they want their truck to perform better on.

Also, I just love to read about the subject and what everyone has to say about their own experience with their own setup, I guess that was the underlyinng reason for the post :D
Click to expand...

Well put my friend.
 
SRT-MIKE said:
In the original post I was really looking to compare performance of two stock trucks with a basic SC upgrade, driven under the same conditions, and possibly by the same driver. I really did not intend to establish product superiority, but maybe looking for reports from people who have experience with both setups under a variety of conditions. That way people can make a choice based on which conditions they want their truck to perform better on.

Also, I just love to read about the subject and what everyone has to say about their own experience with their own setup, I guess that was the underlyinng reason for the post :D
Click to expand...
Yeah, but it's so much more fun to argue superiority, :D lol.


Besides, everyone knows that built N/A is the way to go anyway. :rofl:
 
this thread is like arguing about what is better a blowjob from Jessica Alba or Angelina Jolie
 
eddie102870 said:
id say jolie has more experience
Click to expand...


hmmm don't know if that is good or bad,.....would mess me up to visualize the whole Billy Bob Thorton thing....:dontknow:
 
if she'd put on that lara croft outfit id forget about billy bob...lol
 
Rice Eater said:
one other point to make here is that with the paxton you can go with a custom heat exchanger which is good if you live in the mojave valley or some sweltering place. both applicatioins wake the F up when it gets cold.
Click to expand...

How cold is cold?

It is not recommended to run the Paxton at less than 27F without preheating the engine somehow. A.F.A.I.K. it isn't a concern with the Roe or other twin-screw (factory systems).

Cold is a consideration where I live...

Ron
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Support Us

Become A Supporting Member Today!

Click Here For Details

Random Media

00000462
IMG 0259
3976.jpg
3841.jpeg
Back
Top