Supercharger or turbocharger

[MCPOAJ]

Originally Posted by chevyforlife

i think that the turbos should be for the imports and leave the american cars to be supercharged. personally i'd rather have a zz572 n/a then a twin turbo 4 banger but that would be expensive so ill settle for the supercharged V-8

and welcome to the forum we like to rock it here

[chevyforlife]

Originally Posted by MCPOAJ

and welcome to the forum we like to rock it here

haha that should be us on the weekends

[radz28]

:party0038: :5thgenvert:

[GTAHVIT]

Originally Posted by Shadow-phoenix

didn't realize that superchargers needed intercoolers too... good to know. I'll keep that in mind. I'm leaning more towards a super-charger, IMO, Superchargers aremore of a classic musclecsr thing, and turbochargers are more of a tuner thing.

In general, superchargers don't need intercoolers. But they perform significantly better if you have one. Then you have the argument of Air or water intercoolers.

[COPO_Chevy]

Originally Posted by DGthe3

Well, while it is true that superchargers were first used in cars by germans, and GM produced the first car with a turbocharger in the 50's, the impression is still that superchargers are more american than turbo's.

hmm i thought i read that sumwere..thanx for the info and for me supercharger..but i still love the great rubble of an N/A muscle car music to my ears

[Georgianne]

perhaps someone could outline the "yea" and "neah" to both the super and turbo? i can't decide which would be best.

[Mr. Wyndham]

Originally Posted by Georgianne

perhaps someone could outline the "yea" and "neah" to both the super and turbo? i can't decide which would be best.

oooh, the responses to this should be fun to read. If you thought the SS vs Z28 debates were bad, this should be interesting.

[DGthe3]

Originally Posted by Dragoneye

oooh, the responses to this should be fun to read. If you thought the SS vs Z28 debates were bad, this should be interesting.

We need a smiley eating popcorn while sitting on a couch. Some threads are just fun to read

[Georgianne]

Originally Posted by Dragoneye

oooh, the responses to this should be fun to read. If you thought the SS vs Z28 debates were bad, this should be interesting.

I personally have decided on the Z28 so lets see where this takes us!

[The_Stache]

Originally Posted by Georgianne

perhaps someone could outline the "yea" and "neah" to both the super and turbo? i can't decide which would be best.

Its all dependant on to many factors to list, mainly i say the same thing about car stereos when asked "which one is the best".

What do YOU want it to do? Then go research how to make it do that.

[stovt001]

Originally Posted by DGthe3

We need a smiley eating popcorn while sitting on a couch. Some threads are just fun to read

Seconded

[Georgianne]

Originally Posted by diarmadhi

Its all dependant on to many factors to list, mainly i say the same thing about car stereos when asked "which one is the best".

What do YOU want it to do? Then go research how to make it do that.

chicken

[Mindz]

Originally Posted by Georgianne

perhaps someone could outline the "yea" and "neah" to both the super and turbo? i can't decide which would be best.

Turbos work off engine exhaust, the higher the rpm's the more exhaust flowing, the faster the turbo goes, the more air the turbo blows into the engine. Because there's little to no boost at low rpm's, this process has come to be known as turbo lag. At 2k rpms on a large turbo, the fan blade isn't moving fairly fast enough to produce the same amount of boost as it would at 4k rpms or 6k rpms. Turbos



Superchargers are belt driven. The engine uses a slight bit of power to drive a belt which powers the propulsion system. Because superchargers use a belt and are connected to the engine, they're not as efficient as turbos. The balance however, is that there is no lag however and you get the power you want right off the bat. Usually a supercharger delivers a lower boost setting than a turbo could/would have because of it's instant readiness.

Basically, they both do the same thing. If you check my first post, you can hear the difference between the belt and the turbo noises. One has lag but can produce more power, probably better for straightaways and big power gains. The other is better for more torque and power at low rpms (corners and low speed segments of tracks).

Here's a more in depth article written by professionals. Some might think they're biased against turbos since they only sell blowers, but I think they're pretty fair in their explanations.

http://www.superchargeronline.com/content.asp?ID=19

[Emu the Foo]

Originally Posted by Mindz

Turbos work off engine exhaust, the higher the rpm's the more exhaust flowing, the faster the turbo goes, the more air the turbo blows into the engine. Because there's little to no boost at low rpm's, this process has come to be known as turbo lag. At 2k rpms on a large turbo, the fan blade isn't moving fairly fast enough to produce the same amount of boost as it would at 4k rpms or 6k rpms. Turbos



Superchargers are belt driven. The engine uses a slight bit of power to drive a belt which powers the propulsion system. Because superchargers use a belt and are connected to the engine, they're not as efficient as turbos. The balance however, is that there is no lag however and you get the power you want right off the bat. Usually a supercharger delivers a lower boost setting than a turbo could/would have because of it's instant readiness.

Basically, they both do the same thing. If you check my first post, you can hear the difference between the belt and the turbo noises. One has lag but can produce more power, probably better for straightaways and big power gains. The other is better for more torque and power at low rpms (corners and low speed segments of tracks).

Here's a more in depth article written by professionals. Some might think they're biased against turbos since they only sell blowers, but I think they're pretty fair in their explanations.

http://www.superchargeronline.com/content.asp?ID=19

good call. also tho turbos almost always use engine oil. whereas superchargers got their own thing goin on with oil. but they both do there own thing. if you want more overall torque, turbo is where its at, ONLY if you do it completly right.

super chargers are more horses and right off the line. its constantly going so there wont be a sudden torque type thing all of a sudden. but you will get pushed back when you shift gears. considering this car wont go past 6k or 6.5k rpms id say supercharger. whereas honda's vtec can redline at up to 9k rpm so turbo would do you a great deal. also when turbo does kick in and you get smoked it sounds like a jet taking off... person experiance. but super gives you that mean hum and you will know.

just my thought. also does anyone know which puts out more heat. i know s/c can put some out but i heard t/c puts out a great peal and could mess up your daily driver. this ture?