• Mustang Forums
  • 1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk-
  • 1994 - 1995 Specific Tech

Blown vs. Turbo

  • Thread starter Thread starter jmhkas
  • Start date Start date Apr 4, 2007
  • 1
  • 2
Next
1 of 2 Next Last
J

jmhkas

New Member
Jun 14, 2006
82
0
0
Bowling Green, KY
Apr 4, 2007
#1
  • Apr 4, 2007
  • #1
Give me a summary of pro and cons of each please!!!
 

99FiveOh

15 Year Member
May 20, 2006
2,051
20
99
J-Ville, FL
Apr 4, 2007
#2
  • Apr 4, 2007
  • #2
Have you been hiding under a rock? j/k.

I'll do my best.

Supercharger Pros:

Usually less expensive
alot less complex
easier to install
cooler underhood temps than turbos

Cons:

Parasitic loss from being driven by the crank
Stress on the crank bearings
Boost is linear to engine RPMs so boost doesn't come on as fast as turbos
Makes less power than turbos lb for lb

Turbo pro's

Like having "free power" meaning no extra load on the engine to drive it
Boost comes on pretty fast and max boost is reached much sooner than S/C's
Being able to control boost level from the driver's seat!
Killer sound!
Can be setup in a "Twin" fashion which is just cooler.
Simple kits can build serious HP
Alot of parts can be had for crazy cheap prices if found in junkyards

Turbo cons:

A whole lot of underhood heat which can damage alot of electronics and such prematurely.
Installing the kits can be really involved as they are much more complex than S/C kits.
Since turbo's use exhaust to operate, this means they get alot hotter than S/C head units, so their charge temps are much higher as well, requiring some kind of intercooler setup.
All the extra piping and accessories adds more weight than your typical S/C setup.
Since the boost comes on so quick, if there's a problem like detonation, it's usually too late to get out of the boost before disaster strikes.

I'm sure there's some things I didn't hit on and there's things that hardcore Turbo guys will probably have a problem with. Turbomustangs.com is an awsome site to gain all kinds of knowledge on turbos.
 

OrangeMustangGt

Founding Member
Mar 7, 2002
1,976
0
36
Cape Cod, MA
Apr 4, 2007
#3
  • Apr 4, 2007
  • #3
dont forget the main advantage of turbos. You get full boost at a set, usually low rpm!
 

Black95GTS

Active Member
Jan 8, 2004
1,644
3
38
Marlborough, MA
Apr 4, 2007
#4
  • Apr 4, 2007
  • #4
jmhkas said:
Give me a summary of pro and cons of each please!!!
Click to expand...

Holy search function. Google here too. I mean, this is like when my parents call me at my apartment because they need help with consumer electronics yet haven't even tried to unwrap the instruction manual.

Adam
 

99FiveOh

15 Year Member
May 20, 2006
2,051
20
99
J-Ville, FL
Apr 4, 2007
#5
  • Apr 4, 2007
  • #5
GreenMustangGt said:
dont forget the main advantage of turbos. You get full boost at a set, usually low rpm!
Click to expand...

Did you even read my post? That point was mentioned in my "Turbo Pros" section..
 
T

tjh566

New Member
May 22, 2004
608
0
0
Northern Va
Apr 4, 2007
#6
  • Apr 4, 2007
  • #6
Actually, dependant on what type of blower you have some of that information is incorrect. Like my supercharger, I got full boost at 1500rpm, show me a turbo car doing that. This is a roots style blower, or a twin screw style such as the kenne bell. The one he has described is one like a vortech, It functions "kinda" like a turbo as boost builds with rpm. Also, alot of turbos have turbo lag, in which most kits sized for racing dont come in full boost till 3000+.


All in all, a Turbo is better, more peak power, no power loss for a belt drive, adjustable boost levels, etc. Only thing as said above a turbo system is alot more complicated.
 

BlackVert

15 Year Member
Oct 3, 2003
5,589
9
98
Bethesda, MD
Apr 4, 2007
#7
  • Apr 4, 2007
  • #7
big inch n/a
 
C

cbarr300

Member
Jun 6, 2006
746
0
17
goose creek, SC
Apr 4, 2007
#8
  • Apr 4, 2007
  • #8
Turbo lag with a V8? I haven't heard too many people complain about that....I guess it depends on your setup though.

Twin turbo....the name just sounds better. Not to mention all the chrome piping you could have up under the hood.

Really though, if your car is a daily driver I'd go with a vortech or similar centrifugal supercharger. You keep stock like driveability under 4000 or so rpms....which can help save gas...but when you need it to be quick, you have it at the mash of a pedal.

everyone else hit pretty well with the pros and cons.
 
T

tjh566

New Member
May 22, 2004
608
0
0
Northern Va
Apr 4, 2007
#9
  • Apr 4, 2007
  • #9
well if racing is your game you put a big turbo because you'll be in high rpms during racing. if you use that setup on the street it will lag a little.
 

94GTLaserRC

Squint as you approach, lest you be blinded by my
15 Year Member
May 7, 2002
11,178
13
89
Ernan Says "here it comes... dushbag"
Apr 4, 2007
#10
  • Apr 4, 2007
  • #10
Nice write up by "THE MUSTANG"

RC
 
C

cbarr300

Member
Jun 6, 2006
746
0
17
goose creek, SC
Apr 4, 2007
#11
  • Apr 4, 2007
  • #11
haha yeah, I know what you're saying. That's why I put that it depends on your setup.

How's that m90 going for you?
 

ProKiller

Founding Member
Apr 26, 2002
3,064
15
78
PA
Apr 5, 2007
#12
  • Apr 5, 2007
  • #12
go get a used vortech and put that on and call it day...
 

mustangkid05

New Member
Mar 10, 2006
199
0
0
Apr 5, 2007
#13
  • Apr 5, 2007
  • #13
plus one for the supercharger it = more women
 
T

twoturbofox

New Member
Jun 23, 2006
5
0
1
Apr 5, 2007
#14
  • Apr 5, 2007
  • #14
cbarr300 said:
Turbo lag with a V8? I haven't heard too many people complain about that....I guess it depends on your setup though.

Twin turbo....the name just sounds better. Not to mention all the chrome piping you could have up under the hood.

Really though, if your car is a daily driver I'd go with a vortech or similar centrifugal supercharger. You keep stock like driveability under 4000 or so rpms....which can help save gas...but when you need it to be quick, you have it at the mash of a pedal.

everyone else hit pretty well with the pros and cons.
Click to expand...

sorry have to disagree. For a daily driver I would go turbo all the way. You control the load with your right foot, therefore you have full control over boost. You can drive the car and not even notice you have a turbo in there. Driveability with a turbo is sensational. I drove mine for over 10k miles without a tune, getting up to 18 mpg, trapping 120mph. I would never ever run a supercharger on anything after this.
 
W

wytstang

Mustang Master
Mar 14, 2004
4,988
4
78
Summerville,SC missing South Fl. weather :(
Apr 5, 2007
#15
  • Apr 5, 2007
  • #15
turbo kits wait time can be months for it to be built (unless you peice it togther faster). Superchargers take 2 days to install using hand tools and roughly 3-5 days arrival time. A daily driver for light to light action a Kenne Bell is funner with torque almost instant.
 

illwood

Member
Apr 3, 2004
636
1
19
Worcester, MA
Apr 5, 2007
#16
  • Apr 5, 2007
  • #16
twoturbofox said:
sorry have to disagree. For a daily driver I would go turbo all the way. You control the load with your right foot, therefore you have full control over boost. You can drive the car and not even notice you have a turbo in there. Driveability with a turbo is sensational. I drove mine for over 10k miles without a tune, getting up to 18 mpg, trapping 120mph. I would never ever run a supercharger on anything after this.
Click to expand...
Jeff, I'm not surprised that this post caught you attention long enough to post.

So, IMO, the pros and cons of turbos are as follows:

Pros:
-Superior means for making power by boost

Cons:
-Not usually a cookie cutter solution


Pros and cons of superchargers:


Pros:
-Usually easy to buy a kit that will bolt in on a Saturday or weekend.

Cons:
-Most things listed above.

How much time and effort are you planning on putting into this? Looking for instant gratification, go supercharger, looking for to have a sweet setup and willing to put serious time and research into it, go turbo.

"You've paid your money, now make your decision" -R. Norton
 

Stanger007

Founding Member
Sep 26, 2001
2,015
2
46
Baton Rouge, LA
Apr 5, 2007
#17
  • Apr 5, 2007
  • #17
When you search you'll notice that most of the guys that are serious about horsepower and start off running superchargers eventually end up with turbos.

That being said, the comments above are GREAT advice on both options.

I'm about to install a Vortech V1 S-trim on my '95 - why? Well my car is a daily driver, so I value reliability. I also value doing ALL the work on it that I can myself and I want something that has been proven and is easy to find information on as I take this first step on boost. (I also tune my own car - twEECer R/T)

After the supercharger I'm tossing around the idea of putting a turbo/EFI motor in my other Mustang - the S-trim is my "safe" way of cutting my teeth on a boosted application first and learning the ropes before I head to the turbo.

My neighbor and I are finishing up a motor rebuild/turbo install on his Integra - so I've been doing a lot of research and listening to him on the finer points of a turbo system... they definitely seem like the way to go if you don't mind a little fabrication and making things fit.

So there's my personal experience... YMMV.

Wes
 

94GTLaserRC

Squint as you approach, lest you be blinded by my
15 Year Member
May 7, 2002
11,178
13
89
Ernan Says "here it comes... dushbag"
Apr 5, 2007
#18
  • Apr 5, 2007
  • #18
(any) Power adder = FUN!!

RC
 
J

jmhkas

New Member
Jun 14, 2006
82
0
0
Bowling Green, KY
Apr 5, 2007
#19
  • Apr 5, 2007
  • #19
Personally leaning toward the supercharger. I had Vortech's were good, but seems everyone is really loving the Kenne Bell
 
T

tjh566

New Member
May 22, 2004
608
0
0
Northern Va
Apr 5, 2007
#20
  • Apr 5, 2007
  • #20
a kenne bell will "feel" alot faster than a vortech because of enormous amount of low end torque. You'd have more fun with a kenne bell if your mostly street driving.


cbarr300 said:
haha yeah, I know what you're saying. That's why I put that it depends on your setup.

How's that m90 going for you?
Click to expand...


Running good, I hope i just fixed the slipping belt, and gonna get some sticky tires then going back to the track and hoping for low 8's in my local 1/8th mile track. With the belt slipping and me losing psi in the upper rpm, and no traction, it ran a 8.9@80mph.
 
  • 1
  • 2
Next
1 of 2 Next Last
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

A
Help ID - Turbo GT, SVO differences
  • aldoelmalo
  • Jun 2, 2026
  • 1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk-
Replies
0
Views
193
1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk- Jun 2, 2026
aldoelmalo
A
K
Engine Gt40p vs 180 procomp
  • Kleinjj27
  • Oct 27, 2026
  • Fox 5.0 Mustang Tech
Replies
17
Views
417
Fox 5.0 Mustang Tech Nov 3, 2026
Kleinjj27
K
D
2006 Roush Stage 2 Mustang Chin Spoiler/Lower Grill Inserts Needed
  • DG_Damn_Good
  • Oct 13, 2026
  • The Welcome Wagon
Replies
6
Views
215
The Welcome Wagon Oct 14, 2026
DG_Damn_Good
D
Engine Suggestions on an engine rebuild. Stock cam/GT40Ps or aftermarket on both for a fun weekend driver?
  • MadSquirrelTech
  • Apr 28, 2026
  • Fox 5.0 Mustang Tech
  • 2
Replies
23
Views
1K
Fox 5.0 Mustang Tech May 7, 2026
MadSquirrelTech
H
turbo advice
  • hawkinsdrag
  • May 5, 2025
  • 1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk-
Replies
11
Views
607
1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk- May 9, 2025
hoopty5.0
Share:
Bluesky Email Share Link
  • Mustang Forums
  • 1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk-
  • 1994 - 1995 Specific Tech
Menu
Log in

Register

  • Forums
  • What's new
  • Media
  • Resources
  • Contact
  • Sponsor
X

Privacy & Transparency

We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:

  • Personalized ads and content
  • Content measurement and audience insights

Do you accept cookies and these technologies?

X

Privacy & Transparency

We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:

  • Personalized ads and content
  • Content measurement and audience insights

Do you accept cookies and these technologies?