Highlander

Why would anybody go with the single turbo hassle if a supercharger is as good?

What is the advantage of the turbo over the suepercharger?

I know the turbo doesn't run of the engine but the turbo HEATS up the air a lot more...

Why is this feever if it is easier to install a supercharger with less custom stuff and a lot cheaper to upgrade...

I mean you can use your headers and y-pipe and stuff...

It seems to me that a turbo is a tighter fit and more hassle for the performance...

What about changing your plugs with the turbo? and when you have a miss???

Just wanted to know what you guys think.

------------------
94B4C M6
Finishing project
Borla Competition--
AFR Heads
383 + Paxton Supercharger

got_hp?

reasons im going to do turbo


1 - its different

2 - turbo spoool + blow off sounds way better than a blower

3 - less stress on motor.......a supercharger always runs........with a turbo, its very easy to drive around daily without hitting boost.....or if you have an electronic boost controller.....you can just turn your boost down very low for daily driving.

4 - pretty much EVERY story i read about a supercharger involves someone blowing/rebuilding their engine at some point. sure there arent many turbo lt1's around, but other turbo cars seem to handle daily driving alot more reliably than superchargers.

Joe Brodman

Yes, at least for F-bodys

Quote:

<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">2 - turbo spoool + blow off sounds way better than a blower

Uhhhh....my roomate's has a BOV on his supercharged SS. And that supercharger whine (ATI D1) is pretty bad-***.

Quote:

<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">3 - less stress on motor.......a supercharger always runs........with a turbo, its very easy to drive around daily without hitting boost.....or if you have an electronic boost controller.....you can just turn your boost down very low for daily driving.

Yes and no. I've never talked to any turbo LT1/LS1 owners in person (though I saw a sweet 800 RWHP TT LS1 at SLP day). But, I know a 5.0 owner who owns a portable dyno business, and his TT 5.0 makes boost really low. While crusing in a supercharged car, you are not making any boost either.

Quote:

<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">4 - pretty much EVERY story i read about a supercharger involves someone blowing/rebuilding their engine at some point. sure there arent many turbo lt1's around, but other turbo cars seem to handle daily driving alot more reliably than superchargers.

That straight up misinformation. First, you can never compare a car that comes with a turbo or S/C stock w/ a car that has a stock bottom end and you added a supercharger or turbo, simply because the originally N/A car wasn't designed for one. A turbo can be just as hard on a bottom end as a supercharger.

Personally, I like both. If somehow funds permit (which I highly doubt ), I'd like to go single turbo this winter w/ a 383. Instead, I'll probably just go built 396 and spray the **** out of it.


------------------
94 Firebird Formula Ram-Air, M6, T-tops, N2O, 12-Bolt, Bolt-Ons; was running 11's internally stock.432.8 RWHP / 588.4 RWTQ
No new times or dyno numbers with new top end (CC306, 1.6RR's, ported heads, etc.)

Highlander

I see that is different and that people tend to say WOW!!! but...

its the same thing... if you build an engine as I did for the use of a supercharger, everything will work out perfectly with no hassles...

I was just curious because people see turbo and the say WOW. but supercharger is expected.

I though it was a better idea to go with the supercharger since its already massed produced..

------------------
94B4C M6
Finishing project
Borla Competition--
AFR Heads
383 + Paxton Supercharger

LWM

That's what I figure also, larger installed base = larger knowledge base.

LWM

------------------
95 A4, SLP catback, KBDD sfc, airfoil, Vortech S-trim, 30# SVO injectors, Autometer electric FP guage, boost guage, Hotchkis STB, AS&M headers, AFPR, Vortech Aftercooler, 3.125" blower pulley, 7" crank pulley, Vigilante 2,800 stall, MSD 6 BTM, SLP 35mm front bar, SLP 21mm rear bar, LT-1 editor ... , 437hp at the wheels. --- members.shaw.ca/mackenzl/LWMsZ-28/LWMsZ-28.html ... 01 vert in the making ...

TimbrSS

Damn that Joe B. He said everything i was about to say.
I think the best thing about a SC is that they are easier to tune, and since more people have one, easier to trouble shoot.

Rpm280

SOME may do it for the WOW factor, but i feel that is stupid.

Anyways many of the serious guys who know the deal go for the turbo for the greater power potential. Full boost at lower Rpm also attracts people to.
(Not saying that serious guys don't choose blowers, because many do.)


Their both great power adders though. Buth the turbo has greater power potential.

got_hp?

[quote]<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by Joe Brodman:
[b]

Quote:

Uhhhh....my roomate's has a BOV on his supercharged SS. And that supercharger whine (ATI D1) is pretty bad-***.

true......i guess its just personal preference......
like i said ......those are the reasons "I" am going turbo.....not everyone feels the same

Quote:

<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Yes and no. I've never talked to any turbo LT1/LS1 owners in person (though I saw a sweet 800 RWHP TT LS1 at SLP day). But, I know a 5.0 owner who owns a portable dyno business, and his TT 5.0 makes boost really low. While crusing in a supercharged car, you are not making any boost either.

sorry about that.......i was under the impression that supercharger is always showing some level of boost at all rpms above idle.

Quote:

<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">That straight up misinformation. First, you can never compare a car that comes with a turbo or S/C stock w/ a car that has a stock bottom end and you added a supercharger or turbo, simply because the originally N/A car wasn't designed for one. A turbo can be just as hard on a bottom end as a supercharger.

i know maaaaaaaaaaany NA-T cars (turbo onto original NA), that run as daily drivers, and have yet to hear any horror stories of blowing engines etc etc.
but everytime someone asks questions here about a supercharger, someone says "rebuild now, or you WILL rebuild later".

maybe i am misinformed, but it just seems that more people blow engines with superchargers than NA-Turbos.

Quote:

<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Personally, I like both. If somehow funds permit (which I highly doubt ), I'd like to go single turbo this winter w/ a 383. Instead, I'll probably just go built 396 and spray the **** out of it.</font>

hehe....yeah.....i want to go single 355........but im going to do it right and build up the engine first. until i can save up enough money for the turbo rebuild, im considering N20 as a temporary fix for my speed craving.

Jesse_Boyer

you know many cars... or do you know many LT1 cars??? LT1's don't especially like boost. Cheap hypers won't hold up. Whether its from a turbo or blower, it shouldn't matter.

------------------
94 Formula M6 w/ 98+ front clip, P&P heads, CC 306, RK Sport Headers, 1.6 RR's, CSI pump, LT4 starter, 1.5 drop springs, custom SFC's, Fittipaldi 18's

Pics of the Formula

9SECONDLX

I agree, turbos are diferent and neat but they are harder to tune in and there is more info around on superchargered cars and its easier to get things done on them.

good luck..

------------------
9 second street legal 1989 mustang lx, special effects purple, 306 Vortech t trim 20pds of boost, momo; seats-steering wheel and shifter ****, weld drag lites, stage 2 fuel system, cervini stormin normin hood and saleen wing, tfs ported heads and edelbrock rpm intake, 8pt cage.

new project, 1994 Z28, 383 stroker, 4 bolt block with bullet main caps, cola light weight crank, H beam eagle rods, je inverted pistons 9.2 compression with heads, comp cam custom grind cam and 1.6 non self-aligning rockers, afr stage 2 heads 58cc, fully ported LT1 intake powder coated LT4 red, 3 core race intercooler, polished procharger, 3:73 gears, custom torque arm, eibach springs, custom panhard bar and control arms, kyb agx adjustable shocks, ss hood, factory ss spoiler, 58mm bbk throttlebody, B&M ripper shifter, chrome zr1 rims, autometer phantom gauges, edelbrock headers,

zturbo

There is two sides of this boat. I have run turbos for a while cause i personally like them. There is a few reasons for that but when it comes down to it I really like a turbo car. You gotta build what you like. I have thought of going to a blower a few times but they just dont pull my crank so to speak

There is alot of people running blowers on there cars and are very driveable. What it comes down to me really in the long run is you need to run a aftermarket computer with a turbo eventually if you are going to lean on the motor.

Just curious how does the turbo heat up the air more? the compressor side is seperate from the exhaust side. No matter what when you compress air it heats up. plain and simple. You might have a little heat there but the power you are going to lose from driving the belt on a blower is gonna out weigh the heat generated and if you have a good intercooler so that turns into a moot point.

Changing the plugs on my car with the single system i ran was not that hard to do. (ran the turbo tech system and a slp header) doing a plug swap on a set of bbk's was way harder on the drivers side WAY WAY harder
just my .02

Steven

------------------
383 Inches of stroked turbocharged fun.
If one is good shouldnt 2 be great?????
TURBO=TORQUE
TORQUE=FUN
Ask me about Burhead Headers If you are gonna use them
My Car

Highlander

Finally someone from first hand...

The thing is that if you put an intercooler to the supercharger we will end up in the same discussion of the egg and the chicken...

Anyways... I think it is as you say... A matter of taste... for what I have seen supercharger make more power per boost but turbo are like unlimited...

for instance... in my case its a PITA to change the opti since I have to drop the supercharger and the bracket for the waterpump to come off...

------------------
94B4C M6
Finishing project
Borla Competition--
AFR Heads
383 + Paxton Supercharger

lt1camaroman93

How is it that a super charger will yeild more power per psi of boost? A SC eats up more power to make boost than a turbo. All a turbo does is a little extra back pressure in the exahust, but a SC is driven by a belt which means there is more restiction on the rotation of the engine. This is just what i have heard. If i am wrong somebody let me know so i will have my story straight from now on out.

got_hp?

too much backpressure can also slow down the motor.
the trick with turbos is finding the right amount of backpressure for your setup so that its not robbing performance, and it also spools efficiently.

i do believe you are right though, turbos sap less power from the engine.



------------------
3000GT VR4 TT *sold*
new project, 95 t/a....will someone make a good turbo kit already?!?

sleeperz28

I think the knowledge of turbos lacks on this board. First off tuning a turbo car is no different then a supercharged car. In a turbo, my car for example, boost comes on at 2K and holds it throughout the rpm band. Second on a supercharged car there is a lot of strees on the crank hub and the second main cap. And last, the best part about turbos is I have a 900hp daily driver

------------------
1994 Turbocharged Camaro