Page 1 of 16 1 2 3 11 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 159
  1. #1
    Banned User
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Ft.Lauderdale
    Posts
    3,237

    Head to head test-2Rude Vs. ET 68-140 Results

    Long waited results are in... First off I want thank Brian from Mach1 and Nills from Rude Performance for suppling me with the SC's to test. As I said before Both SC's had enginnering designs I liked but you guys wanted proof, we'll I got it.
    Same boat, same day and same conditions;
    I had the opportunity to test the 2 Rude against the Engine Tech 68-140 supercharger. The Engine Tech was supplied to me by Brian at BT Tech and Nills sent me the new rude so I was able to do a back to back test against these two superchargers.
    The new rude is basically a new supercharger impeller shipped along with a new front housing. The weight of the impeller is aproximately 180 grams so it is not a lightweight impeller. They do not use a spacer but instead machined the front housing. It looks like they took a considerable amount of material off the front housing but I fear it may be too much and my concern is that this can cause an eventual failure. As the metal fatigues caused by heat cycling, such thin material can warp and cause reliability issues IMO.
    The Engine Tech supercharger consists of a new supercharger impeller, a new front housing and a spacer to allow clearance for the extra tall blades of the impeller. I favor this approach better as the strutral integrity of the front housing is in tact and there is no worry about possible future failures due to heat cycling.
    With the Engine Tech installed in my ski my engine was turning 8760-8800 RPM's with about 15 psi of boost. The acceleration was seemless and strong from bottom to top. This supercharger actually has too much bottom end if that is possible as it easily cavitates my prop on the bottom end but as soon as it hooks it just accelerates like a missle to its max rpm's.
    Next up was the 2 Rude. The acceleration was not as strong compared to the Engine Tech but is definately better than the old rude. My maximum RPM's were 8620-8660 RPM's and maximum boost pressure was 14 psi. Like the Engine Tech the new rude caused my prop to cavitate but just a little bit, no where as severe compared to the other supercharger.
    This test was conducted on smooth/glass fresh water with a slight ripple.
    My conclusion is that although the new rude supercharger is an improvement over the older one, it is about 100-150 RPM's under the Engine Tech 68-140 This accounts for about 1.5 MPH difference between the two superchargers.
    I would not say that the Engine Tech "blew" the new rude away performance wise but the Engine Tech is clearly the winner when comparing acceleration and top end speed.

    Hope you enjoy,
    Alex


  2. #2

    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Rydal, Georgia U S A
    Posts
    3,936
    +1
    14
    Too much hit off the bottom is sometimes a problem... Bc the impeller has to pull from the LE and hurts top end

  3. #3
    Banned User
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Ft.Lauderdale
    Posts
    3,237
    Quote Originally Posted by jawz View Post
    Too much hit off the bottom is sometimes a problem... Bc the impeller has to pull from the LE and hurts top end
    I wouldn't say 84+ with the ET and 83 with the 2Rude is hurting.. Both where flying..

    I gotta give a major two thumbs up to both Brian and Nills..Without these two guys we'd still be fighting 80MPH.. Also PBJ for driving me spend more money to not being beat again!!

  4. #4
    speedskixp's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    venice fl.
    Posts
    8,117
    +1
    120
    Oh boy, here we go.

  5. #5
    And I thought it was that you were finally going to debut the Bowtie!

  6. #6
    formerly Gold06RXP Turbo Nick's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Dayton, OH
    Posts
    2,095
    +1
    97
    Where can you get this Etech SC at?

  7. #7
    The most interesting man in the world. Nils888's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    California
    Posts
    4,230
    +1
    1,043
    Thanks for the info Alex!!! Guess I will have to get 3 rude out!!

  8. #8
    Quote Originally Posted by Nils888 View Post
    Thanks for the info Alex!!! Guess I will have to get 3 rude out!!
    I hope you're serious. MORE POWER DAMMIT!!! Please!


    Thanks for the report Alex!

  9. #9
    speedskixp's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    venice fl.
    Posts
    8,117
    +1
    120
    Quote Originally Posted by Nils888 View Post
    Thanks for the info Alex!!! Guess I will have to get 3 rude out!!
    Way to be.

  10. #10
    Cutter's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Vancouver, B.C.
    Posts
    160
    +1
    3
    Who sells the ET Charger and how much is it??

Page 1 of 16 1 2 3 11 ... LastLast

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. ET 137-4 vs ET 68-140 vs Riva XX2
    By WickedXP in forum 4-Tec Performance
    Replies: 26
    Last Post: 03-25-2015, 11:01 PM
  2. Back to back Rude 3 Vs. Et 70-145
    By Turbo Nick in forum 4-Tec Performance
    Replies: 74
    Last Post: 02-16-2013, 12:02 PM
  3. differences between et 137 vs et 68-140???
    By 98gsxl951 in forum 4-Tec Performance
    Replies: 11
    Last Post: 09-19-2011, 05:36 PM
  4. WTB ET 68-140 or ET 137 or 2RUDE!!!
    By mitsakosgt in forum Sea Doo Classifieds
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 08-01-2011, 01:46 AM
  5. 2Rude against the ET 68-140 RESULTS!
    By Water4fire in forum 4-Tec Performance
    Replies: 148
    Last Post: 11-05-2008, 11:45 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •