Supercharger Opinions

i bet you would find the information you are looking for faster with a search. i am sure that it would also create more questions for you to ask. i suggest trying that for the best results. that way, you have more information at your disposal to reply to the comments that are posted in this thread! good luck. i am also waiting for something tech related to be posted in this thread before it gets moved to talk.

If your ride is a daily driver then I think you should stongly consider a turbo over a blower. The turbo is more fuel efficient and more importantly much easier on your motor. The crank is not designed for the extra load of a supercharger and it is a huge load on your motor. You might not have as much on the low end with a turbo but street tires can't handle an 8psi supercharger out of the hole even with 3.31 gears. I really like the single turbo from HP. It is a nicely balanced system and the lag should be fairly minimal. If you are concerned about lag then look into a twin turbo. Good Luck.

But -- if you drive a twin-screw supercharged car normally, it will perform just as a NA car would...

You have the power at the pedal and when you stomp on it, the power is immediate...

Saleen and KB units perform well even in traffic with no adverse effects...

You decide!!!

Dave

If you want to keep your air intake you should get the saleen.

I agree with Discofan that the power is always there with a twin screw, but the price you pay for that is that your crank is always spinning the supercharger. The car may perform like a NA car but the reality is that you are always making boost, you just don't feel it at lower RPMs because you are using power to make the boost in the first place, it is just a balance of power at that point. People like Kenne Bell claim that their superchargers don't make boost unless you call for it but the crank is always turning that twin screw,does the SC magically know if you want boost or not? Dyno numbers prove that these units are making power all day long regardless of the rpm. For the track I vote for twinscrew all the way but I like the turbo for a daily driver that will last.

csl500 said:

Hey! I have a black 05 mustang gt with slp loudmouths and a steeda cai. I've decided to raise the bar and do some forced induction, preferably a supercharger(but im not ruling out turbochargers ). At the moment i'm undecided about what to get, which is why i need yalls help! It would help out a lot if I could hear some of yalls opinions on what i should possibly buy. Thanks!

Click to expand...

See below. However, what you decide to buy is up to you.

bigcat said:

i bet you would find the information you are looking for faster with a search. i am sure that it would also create more questions for you to ask. i suggest trying that for the best results. that way, you have more information at your disposal to reply to the comments that are posted in this thread! good luck. i am also waiting for something tech related to be posted in this thread before it gets moved to talk.

Click to expand...

That won't be happening anytime soon, Sport. You mock me so. hahahahahaha (deserved at that)

MikeysOTP said:

If your ride is a daily driver then I think you should stongly consider a turbo over a blower. The turbo is more fuel efficient and more importantly much easier on your motor. The crank is not designed for the extra load of a supercharger and it is a huge load on your motor. You might not have as much on the low end with a turbo but street tires can't handle an 8psi supercharger out of the hole even with 3.31 gears. I really like the single turbo from HP. It is a nicely balanced system and the lag should be fairly minimal. If you are concerned about lag then look into a twin turbo. Good Luck.

Click to expand...

MikeysOTP said:

I agree with Discofan that the power is always there with a twin screw, but the price you pay for that is that your crank is always spinning the supercharger. The car may perform like a NA car but the reality is that you are always making boost, you just don't feel it at lower RPMs because you are using power to make the boost in the first place, it is just a balance of power at that point. People like Kenne Bell claim that their superchargers don't make boost unless you call for it but the crank is always turning that twin screw,does the SC magically know if you want boost or not? Dyno numbers prove that these units are making power all day long regardless of the rpm. For the track I vote for twinscrew all the way but I like the turbo for a daily driver that will last.

Click to expand...

TRUE - The turbo is more efficient than a SC as it uses exhaust gases instead of the crank.

TRUE – The crank is continually spinning with any SC regardless it being a roots, twin screw or centrifugal.

TRUE –AND-FALSE - The stock crank is not intentionally "designed" for a specific additional load from a SC; however, excess load from induction is factored in when crank design is determined. What that number is, I do not know. So, I must disagree as to the statement that excess load on the crank is a huge load on the motor. Quick reasoning on this is if we look at the modifications that Saleen does to their standard Supercharged S281 there is no mention of an upgraded crank. When you hit the S281E then, yes, you see upgrades to the crank, connecting rods and pistons. However, it is these modifications in combination with the TS SC and modulated tuning that create the 550 HP/ 525 TQ compared to the SC S281 with 465/425.

Which induction method causes more/less engine-vehicle damage? It really depends on the application, use and accompanying modifications that must be made along with the increase in HP/TQ. Modification reengineering is not as simple as “Buy It and Slap It On Yo”. It takes careful and methodical planning to create a balanced daily driver.

So – Since a turbo has to spool up before the boost is delivered and there is a surge of power delivered immediately when the wastegate opens – say around 3000 rpm- you can see engine and drivetrain damage. In as much as an 8psi SC Sang with street tires can have traction loss, so can a turbo. Same evil outcome; different methods of damage.

In general and widespread, superchargers enjoy a substantial reliability advantage over the turbo. Sorry. It is what it is. One area of concern is that when the engine is off and the turbo is neutral any residual oil inside the turbo's bearings “can” bake by stored engine heat. This, combined with the turbo's extremely high rpms (up to 150,000rpm) can cause problems with the internal bearings and can shorten the turbo’s life. And finally, many turbos kits require extensive aftermarket exhaust modifications as well.

So, it all depends on what you want. When we look at the Mustang world, we are most often going to find long standing reputable supercharging companies that have worked years to perfect their products. If you are a person who likes the benefits of turbocharging, I am cool with that too. Just make sure you find reputable companies that have perfected their products and stand behind their reliability. Either option (SC / TC) is a deviation from the standard design of the vehicle and reinforcing modifications will need to be made – SOMEWHERE.

So boy and girls,

If I'm reading this correctly and to quote a phrase made by Jennifer,

"In general and widespread, superchargers enjoy a substantial reliability advantage over the turbo."

Looks like we are back to the twin screw supercharger!!!

"It is what it is"

Then through deductive reasoning, the answer is _________________...

Dave

I am not sure how much money you are willing to spend on your car. I recently went just a "tad" overboard with mine. So food for thought..here are a few things you might want to consider. If you SC or TC, in most cases other mods will be needed to support it. I had a ProCharger D1SC with 800+ HP Intercooler installed. With that I needed to upgrade my fuel delivery system. That was upgraded to Dual GT fuel pumps in tank, new fuel lines, MSD Boost A Pump. Then I needed guages for fuel pressure and boost. I get all this installed and my engine is having a fit with spark. The stock coil packs can't handle it. So now I need to upgrade my coil packs. Now I have power BUT..I have to get it to the wheels. Here comes the 4.30 gears to help transfer the power. Great I got it to the wheels now the wheels won't hook, so on the drag radials. In short there are a lot of things to consider with a SC. I admit I went a little crazy because I also had line locks installed, a JBA exhaust system and a few other little gadgets. In the end the mods I got was $15k. My car is done. It Dyno'd at 520.9 RWHP with 475 lbs of torque. This car will scare the hell out of you. Am I sorry I did it?? HELL NO!!
I love it!! Just thought I'd throw my 2 cents in too.
I decided to put all my $$ under the hood..so to speak. Just looking at the car it doesn't look like anything special.
I will do more to the body now that my power mods have been done. I only lost 2 mpg on highway driving. This car putting out that much HP..I am still getting 23 mpg on the highway. This IS an everyday car for me.

Flaks05GT
Just curious how much boost it took to make those HP#s?

That is too much power for the stock pistons and rods. You better save for a shortblock rebuild because I forsee a large hole in your block.
I would love to see your dyno sheet because you must be pushing some lean a/f and a lot of boost to reach those numbers.
I would leave the body alone. It looks great as it is. Body kits are not attractive on these cars in my opinion.

Believe it or not..I am only running 10 psi boost. My Dyno sheet is listed now.
Look on the Dyno Sheet Collection Sticky bigcat posted.

It's probably a Dynojet that was used. My car has been on several dynos and the only one I trust is the Mustang dyno. A Dynojet showed I have 515 at the wheels and the Mustang dyno showed 490 which is what I tell people only because it's the truth.

Lol you're one of the few I've heard that like the Mustang dyno. Mustang dyno's always show lower numbers than the other dynos out there (dyno jet). But to each their own. I don't know which is better and which is worse or which is true and which is not.

I would also have to disagree with StonePony. 520rwhp is not too much for the stock pistons and rods. There are a few cars out there running 600+ on the stock internals that competitively drag race. You just have to have a damn good tune and not rip on it too much if it's your daily. You also better be damn sure that you don't run lean or you will throw a connecting rod.

[Here is a copy and paste from another guy that asked the same question...some of it might not makes sense like the refrence to the procharger but it still all applies]


Hmmm…. one of the most difficult decisions I still have to make as well. Let me start out with the supercharger. I’ve just recently seriously started thinking about a turbo setup but have been reading and researching superchargers for some time now.


Superchargers

Procharger as you well know is a centrifugal supercharger. Don’t get me wrong they are great power adders but if you’re going to be spending the money I highly suggest a twin-screw setup and here is why. Centrifugal superchargers are great but lack bottom end boost. Meaning your not going to have as much bottom end power in the low RPMs. Roots on the opposite end like the Eaton S/C have great low end boost but lack in top end and to be honest really aren’t in the S/C market anymore just because of the twin-screw application blowing up. Now this takes me to twin screws…. they combine the best of both worlds and give you great consistent boost throughout your band. Another advantage to twin screws is they are self-lubricated so you don’t have to tap your oil pan.


Brands

As far as suggestions for companies with twin screws I would say FRPP Whipple is the best choice IMO. Second would be KB and third Saleen.


Turbos

As for turbos. Ill start off with some stuff about gas mileage just because I know its something to consider with the gas prices now days. Superchargers because they are belt driven off your motor take HP to run and in that case lower your cars MPG. Turbos on the other hand are well known for being much more efficient because they run off exhaust and heat expansion using none of your engines HP and actually on an average boost your MPG by 5 miles or so.

In addition to being more efficient turbos are also known for their durability. They work great and last forever.


Boost

Also superchargers to change boost need to have there pulleys swapped…turbos can have controllers manual or electronic to very boost. Personally I would go with an electronic one that toggles between two boost pressures with the bush of a button. That way I can run 5 PSI or so while driving around casually and when I want to do a bit more spirited driving hit a button and have 10 or 11 PSI at the petal.

Man I forgot how many options there are with turbos.


Single or Twin

There is also the decision on whether to go with single or twin turbos. I think I'm going to go with a twin turbo setup just because running two smaller turbos is more efficient than one big one. They also will have a higher output if one day I decide to build my engine and want some more boost.


Mounting

There are two ways to mount turbos. STS has a system called a squire system that has the turbos at the rear of the car. A lot of people say that this is less effective because there is a loss of pressure due to the air traveling through so much piping. This is true but only about 1 PSI. Now what they left out is that all that traveling cools the air about 100 degrees which is about 45-50 horsepower. Now the loss of 1PSI is only a 10 HP loss.

The other choice is under the hood near the exhaust manifolds/headers. Some like this better because it looks cooler with turbos under the hood but in reality they create a lot of heat. Either way you’re getting the same effect.







here is a good example of why most people end up wishing they went with a turbo. Compare the red lines from the top two graphs [top HP bottom TQ] with the kenne bell. What i think is funny is the kenne bell graph is at 8 PSI and the turbo is at 7 and look at the results.

So the twin screw has an advantage in hp till a little before 3500 RPMs and after that its history. As you can see though the max HP output with the S/C is 400 hp and the turbo is 450 and thats with the extra PSI on the s/c. That means the superchargers drag on the engine from the belt that drives it costs the engine 60hp.

Now for torque the twin screw is putting out a pretty stable 350 to 380 ft-lbs of torque....and the turbo again with 1 psi less is hitting a peak of 480 ft-lbs of torque....almost 100 more ft-lbs.


something youve got to think of as well is like someone else said how are you going to be using it. Superchargers will give you the headstart from a dead stop but after 1st gear it wont because when your shifting through your gears at 6000 rpms your not shifting down and starting back at 1000 rpms....so when you shift into second and are at 3000 or so that disadvantage of bottom end is completely gone because the turbos going to head straight for its peak again.


hope this helped and good luck =]



***here is a picture of a squires type turbo setup....those are the turbos at the exhaust tips***

Hoboattacker said:

Lol you're one of the few I've heard that like the Mustang dyno. Mustang dyno's always show lower numbers than the other dynos out there (dyno jet). But to each their own. I don't know which is better and which is worse or which is true and which is not.

I would also have to disagree with StonePony. 520rwhp is not too much for the stock pistons and rods. There are a few cars out there running 600+ on the stock internals that competitively drag race. You just have to have a damn good tune and not rip on it too much if it's your daily. You also better be damn sure that you don't run lean or you will throw a connecting rod.

Click to expand...

It's not a question of me liking the mustang dyno, it's because they give more accurate hp and tq figures. A mustang dyno doesn't just spin a heavy roller to calculate the figures. It has an electric motor ''like'' contraption in the floor that actually puts a load on the roller that's equal to the car's own weight for a real world test. You also have to punch in other key information which helps the system produce more accurate figures. Dynojets always give inflated #'s. When I see guys talking about the little differences in their #s it's because dynos are different among other factors like elevation, humidity, atmospheric pressure, the tuner's knowledge, etc. Other dyno companies have begun to produce updated versions of their systems in order to produce more accurate figures.

I guarantee you one thing.......you'll never see an aftermarket parts company advertise their performance goodies showing performance gains taken from a mustang dyno because it's not going to inflate the #'s. They want to advertise the largest gains possible which helps sell the products.