10secgoal said:
but what i was talking about was if i had to chose between the two, for creating some decent daily driven power on an american muscle car i would go with a supercharger... not a turbo. IMO
10secgoal said:Are you kidding ? Wgat kinda sense does that make ?!?! I, I don't even know where to begin with this one.
It's funny lag is always talked about with turbos. When you think about it, a super charger has much more lag than any turbo. It takes until just about redline to make full boost. A turbo can be on the wasgate at 3k, full boost.
TMX said:Turbos are good on any car, same bonus. Only reason the combo of imports+turbo is so often thought of is the lag on FWD cars helps them keep traction off the line. Buick is a FWD car. Turbos make atleast 1-3psi even at idle from what I hear, and yes centrifigal chargers may take till red-line to make boost, but they make near full through-out the range. Now a twin screw blower has no lag, at all. You might think lag because of it being related to RPMs, but in fact it doesn't cause any. 7 psi is easier to create at 1000 rpms than 5000 rpms because you need 5 times more air to create the pressure. That's why some turbos and cent superchargers fall off on numbers, they put out the same amount of air but the amount of air coming in doesn't increase for the engine. As for parasitic loss, some blowers have matched the efficiency of turbos.
As for me, the only car of mine getting a power adder will probably be my 2.3 getting a turbo. It's just easier and the parts are more available since there are no 2.3 sc's.
Edit: oh and if your talking twin turbos, then what lag? Also TTs are more on domestics and the select imports with V engines. Only problem is they cost alot and there is no TT kit for our V6 that I know of, but there are still some who have done it and made some good numbers.
Yeah i was trying to contact HP about doing a V6 twin setup but never heard back, unfortunately for me because at the time i actually had the wifes ok on both for the HP stage 2 but since i couldn't get a hold of them and that little expense of tuition it fell through. its a true shame with the low boost numbers that are being put out by those setupsOxMox said:www.tmaturbo.com
nothing but turbo V6 stangs. I know alot about turbos on stangs, cause before I got rid of my v6 i was going to go with a turbo set-up on it... but after reading in other forums how some people were having problems with them, i decided against it.
Turbos are superior to superchargers in almost everyway IMO, BUT... if they're not done right they can and will fu<k up your engine something awefull, justlike any other means of F/I
TMX said:I know about TMA's kits, I was saying there is no twin turbo kit.
Boost can be adjusted on turbos by a adjustable BOV or boost controller. Superchargers need a new pully.
But I like having my eyes slammed into my seat compared to picking up force pushing me into my seat.
OxMox said:they have a TT set-up... so does a few other company's, but there very VERY expensive 8k$ +
TMX said:Turbos are good on any car, same bonus. Only reason the combo of imports+turbo is so often thought of is the lag on FWD cars helps them keep traction off the line. Buick is a FWD car. Turbos make atleast 1-3psi even at idle from what I hear, and yes centrifigal chargers may take till red-line to make boost, but they make near full through-out the range. Now a twin screw blower has no lag, at all. You might think lag because of it being related to RPMs, but in fact it doesn't cause any. 7 psi is easier to create at 1000 rpms than 5000 rpms because you need 5 times more air to create the pressure. That's why some turbos and cent superchargers fall off on numbers, they put out the same amount of air but the amount of air coming in doesn't increase for the engine. As for parasitic loss, some blowers have matched the efficiency of turbos.
As for me, the only car of mine getting a power adder will probably be my 2.3 getting a turbo. It's just easier and the parts are more available since there are no 2.3 sc's.
Edit: oh and if your talking twin turbos, then what lag? Also TTs are more on domestics and the select imports with V engines. Only problem is they cost alot and there is no TT kit for our V6 that I know of, but there are still some who have done it and made some good numbers.
i'm gonna take a stab and say you have never driven a PT Cruiser GT or SRT-4.OxMox said:not little peeshooter turbos. Buick GNX is ok when it's been modded a little... they can grow some balls, but pretty much any other american turbo car (pt cruiser, neon, even some of the svo's are kind sh1tty)
but what i was talking about was if i had to chose between the two, for creating some decent daily driven power on an american muscle car i would go with a supercharger... not a turbo. IMO
really.cruisinV6 said:So I was reading this thread late one night, or early in ght morning depending on how you look at it, and this rediculous fight broke out.
I'd like to change my vote by the way, from turbo to super, on a DD, super has much better maners and that is why they are used so much more than a turbo from a manufacturer stand point.
actually superchargers originated before WWII for aircraft fighter use. but also found a home on Detroit diesels hence the 653/853/471/671/871/692/892 blowers used on detroits. the V6 71 cubic inches/cylinder 2 stroke Detroit used the 671 blower. the 16V92 blower is huge and used on big equipment. they also used blowers and turbo's on the same engine. my old GMC brigider had a 6V92 silver series with the huge 692 blower and a huge Switzer turbo. the blower was for down low and the turbo was for higher in revs. that truck was a single axle dump and would slam you in the seat empty. talk about powersilver_sn95_v6 said:superchargers actually originated from diesels. As to the manufacturers of supercharged cars, you forgot Ford, lets not forget the Lightning and Cobras from '04 and '03. chryslers turbos self immolated after a while, and they dont make a turbo car anymore. mercedes does however have sueprcharged cars and turbo cars, and since they're part of one big happy family now, we'll mark them as indecisive. One car i want to point out that does utilize a supercharger WITH a honda motor, is the Ariel Atom. It's a crazy little machine, and with the upercharger kit it will go 0-60 in 2.5 seconds, with a blower on top of a motor from a Civic type-R. It really depends on your application. Big power...go turbo. Smoother torque band... go supercharged. (btw, drove an evo9 with a turbo today, and it was anything but a smooth torque band. at 3,000 when the turbo kicks in, it's such a sudden onslaught of power it's enough to make a grown man giggl like a little girl, the firt time you hit it it scares the hell out of you)
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?