difference in turbo and SC

[92GreenGT]

I learned a long time ago alot of these guys are s/c guys. Brained washed by the mighty advertising dollar and sponsership money that influences the racing sanctioning bodies. I have ran a DIY tt set-up now I run the juice on my high compression 347 but would love a pre-made tt set-up by Urist or Pro Turbo Systems. The funds are just tight since the plant closing and me going back to school.

Maybe with some real world experience and age they will come around.

Best post ever.

I agree about threads like this being beat to death, people see someone do a DIY turbo kit and think its like installing a K&N filter and is the easiest thing in the world to do so they say they are going to do one too and always ask the same questions as the next guy, Search is the biggest help when looking for turbo info on here or TM.com.

 

[carbed87]

turbo > S/C


thats all you need to know

true, but imo Kenne bell>>>>>>>>turbo

 

[88_GT_5_oh]

for a street application, a think a SC is the best bet.
its cheaper, much easier to install. much easier to maintain and tune. more underhood room, less heat. and gives excellent gains.

a turbo is much more efficient. not really using power to make it like a SC, 10psi with a turbo is more power since its not taking a percentage of your power to produce that 10psi. its basically free

but on the downside. for a complete kit, the are pricey. and to fabricate one you have to have some decent fab and welding skills. not to mention they are harder to tune and keep running right. and tend to require more fuel bc people who go turbo are running 10psi+ and arent messing with low boost level.

its posts like that that get to me. if you don't know don't post

 

[85_SS_302_Coupe]

I'll throw my opinion in here, although some might not agree....



I see turbo as the perfect power adder, second only to nitrous since nitrous is simply an additive. Nitrous takes zero power from the engine to operate, therefor is the most efficient at making power. Now, i'm not saying it makes MORE power or that it's better in any other way other than efficiency.

Turbo runs by the byproduct of the engine running...the exhaust. The engine is going to make exhaust as long as it's running, and since turbo runs off the exhaust, you're basically reusing something that would otherwise be thrown away.

Superchargers take power to turn, and are therefor parasitic of the engine. You could argue that the crank is going to turn as long as the engine is running, just as the exhaust is going to flow, so the two are working in a very similar yet very different way. The turbo does in effect cause drag in the exhaust flow untill it spools up, but the magic of turbo is that it's actually feeding itself since the more air it forces into the engine, the more exhaust the engine forces into the turbo....it's almost self sufficient.

Again...that's just my opinion. Obviously they all 3 have potential to make ridiculous amounts of power, and they each have their pros and cons....i just thought i'd put it out there the way i see it. Even still, if i were doing a power adder on my car, i'd get a roots supercharger with a carb on top.