Would you Twin Turbo for the right price?

[zebra]

Originally Posted by Milk 1027

I voted for 2000-4000 but i'm rethinking that. I would pay much more for something that is reliable and makes enough power.
However, I would much rather have a supercharger than a turbo anyday.

boo!! S/C


cheap
fast
reliable

pick two


i wouldn't mind up to $5k or so, but it better be a good kit. i'd rather pay more and know i'm getting a good product than get the cheaper deal and have it crap out on me

[Silver Streak]

Originally Posted by Nexus6

i voted for the 4k to 6k ,but thats with forged internals and a good boost controller

Forged internals too for 4 to 6k. GL to ya, and if you find something like, definately post

[MerFmobile]

Originally Posted by JackoMan

....i would rather have a continuous power curve....

That's your opinion, and since it is wrong I am calling you out. Nothing personal, you just don't know what you are talking about.

Anyway, I like the premise of the thread but it seems pretty unrealistic to say it's less than 5K. You can bet your ass if I cop out and get a coupe it will be turbo'd....probably not until the warranty was close to expiring. Not sure I would make the venture on a vert, but who knows.

[1320junkie]

There are alot of Twin Turbo Systems for Vettes so I would imagine there would be plenty popping up for the Camaro

[LSX-80MM]

Yea I'm thinking about a 76MM should do it...oh yea...........!

[radz28]

I'm more thinking about a SC but I have an open mind to turbos. I just want something that I can get through CA smog. If I could get a twin kit like that I'd consider that, for sure, but I like the simplicity and tunablity I understand a SC has over turbos. No oil lines to burst, no worries about surging or overboosting, blah blah blah. Then there's my whole relationship I make between imports and turbos (yeah - stupid, I know; if it's good enough for Gale Banks it should be for me). I just like the look of a nice polished blower on the intake instead of a air of snail shell deals hanging off some manifolds/headers. If someone can show me a twin turbo kit, that has CARB numbers, make more power than a CARB approved SC kit, and is comparably priced, then you have my attention. With all the advancements in the new Eaton rotors and the current twin screw rotors, I understand the newer SCs to be just about as efficient as turbos and make about the same about of power. But hey, I've got time, and am open to options

OH - $6K to $7K

[Silver Streak]

Originally Posted by radz282003

I'm more thinking about a SC but I have an open mind to turbos. I just want something that I can get through CA smog. If I could get a twin kit like that I'd consider that, for sure, but I like the simplicity and tunablity I understand a SC has over turbos. No oil lines to burst, no worries about surging or overboosting, blah blah blah. Then there's my whole relationship I make between imports and turbos (yeah - stupid, I know; if it's good enough for Gale Banks it should be for me). I just like the look of a nice polished blower on the intake instead of a air of snail shell deals hanging off some manifolds/headers. If someone can show me a twin turbo kit, that has CARB numbers, make more power than a CARB approved SC kit, and is comparably priced, then you have my attention. With all the advancements in the new Eaton rotors and the current twin screw rotors, I understand the newer SCs to be just about as efficient as turbos and make about the same about of power. But hey, I've got time, and am open to options

OH - $6K to $7K

http://www.turbosystem.com/auto/tech/info.htm

Here is a good link that might get you thinking. Also from a shop approved by GMPP, and used by quite often, in fact the build book for the Ecotecs released by GMPP refers and guides you to these guys for some parts and apps.

[radz28]

Originally Posted by Silver Streak

http://www.turbosystem.com/auto/tech/info.htm

Here is a good link that might get you thinking. Also from a shop approved by GMPP, and used by quite often, in fact the build book for the Ecotecs released by GMPP refers and guides you to these guys for some parts and apps.

Ooo... Looking and thank you

[Keedy]

Originally Posted by ArcAngel

I dont understand why the logic on this site is if you want more performance just get the v8 dont mod your v6...what if you want your v6 to be faster and maintain the higher mpg ??

because for some displacement >= perceived penis size.



THATS WHY I'M GETTING A V8... A BIG ONE...

[Emher]

I'd use other methods to up the power if I needed it. I'm kinda fed up with the turbowhine after having it on Saab though, now I want proper discplacement!

[radz28]

"The differences between turbos and superchargers are subtle but important. Both provide additional air into the engine for more power. The most essential difference is the method of driving the turbo or supercharger. Turbochargers are driven by exhaust energy which is usually otherwise wasted out of your tailpipe into the atmosphere. Superchargers are driven by a belt which draws power from your engine's crankshaft. The advantages of turbocharging over supercharging include:

1. More power produced per pound of boost (intake pressure), since the turbo does not rob engine power from the crankshaft like a supercharger.

But the turbo' is introducing an exhaust restriction, is it not? It may not be taking power in the same way from the engine, as a supercharger, but it seems to me that power is being reduced here too; just in a different way (a semantic I think more than anything that turbo' guys always bring up. I'd like to see a direct comparison under exact circumstances, but that's probably not practical.).

2. Variable power levels: a turbocharged engine can be set up to provide different power (boost) levels at the push of a button, while a supercharged engine requires changing pulleys and belts to change power levels. This turbocharger versatility can be quite handy in many instances.

I can't argue with anything here, but with modular pulley kits out there, it doesn't seem to be that much of a PITA. I don't really considering this to be a deterrent to supercharging. You have to spend as much money on a boost controller as you do on a pulley kit; no?...

3. No maintenance, adjustment or replacement of drive belts and pulleys is required for turbochargers, an aspect which frustrates some supercharger owners.

Can't argue these either. Still, though, not that big of a concern for me.

4. Turbos offer much higher overall power potential, with the ability to be modified easily for higher power levels in the future. Superchargers are more expensive to upgrade for more power, if upgrades exist at all.

Same here. I know you can swap housings here and there and such. I don't think that's the same kind of option as changing rotors or a housing on a supercharger.

5. A supercharger's drive belt will stress the crankshaft and adjacent main bearing due to the additional strain of driving the supercharger, while turbochargers are widely regarded as being quite easy on engines. It is not unusual to see stock type engine components surviving at power levels of two to three times their stock output when turbocharging is employed!

Again - I've read this too and can't speak against it. I think that turbo' is more "gentle" as it doesn't shock the engine as much as a supercharger does. You do see a LOT of crazy horsepower numbers from turbo' cars too.

6. The TurboSystem will usually be easier to install, especially on four cylinder engines."

I'm not sure about V8s, but that's not a biggie for me either.

I'm by no means an expert, not have I gotten experience with either set-up. I hope I'm not coming off as argumentative; I just would like more answers and welcome any input. If this can be elaborated on by the original poster, he may converter a supercharger guy

[Keedy]

its a really dumb reason, but i greatly prefer the look of a supercharger to a turbocharger. It just makes me think of awesome oldschool dragsters.

[Silver Streak]

Originally Posted by radz282003

"The differences between turbos and superchargers are subtle but important. Both provide additional air into the engine for more power. The most essential difference is the method of driving the turbo or supercharger. Turbochargers are driven by exhaust energy which is usually otherwise wasted out of your tailpipe into the atmosphere. Superchargers are driven by a belt which draws power from your engine's crankshaft. The advantages of turbocharging over supercharging include:

1. More power produced per pound of boost (intake pressure), since the turbo does not rob engine power from the crankshaft like a supercharger.

But the turbo' is introducing an exhaust restriction, is it not? It may not be taking power in the same way from the engine, as a supercharger, but it seems to me that power is being reduced here too; just in a different way (a semantic I think more than anything that turbo' guys always bring up. I'd like to see a direct comparison under exact circumstances, but that's probably not practical.).

2. Variable power levels: a turbocharged engine can be set up to provide different power (boost) levels at the push of a button, while a supercharged engine requires changing pulleys and belts to change power levels. This turbocharger versatility can be quite handy in many instances.

I can't argue with anything here, but with modular pulley kits out there, it doesn't seem to be that much of a PITA. I don't really considering this to be a deterrent to supercharging. You have to spend as much money on a boost controller as you do on a pulley kit; no?...

3. No maintenance, adjustment or replacement of drive belts and pulleys is required for turbochargers, an aspect which frustrates some supercharger owners.

Can't argue these either. Still, though, not that big of a concern for me.

4. Turbos offer much higher overall power potential, with the ability to be modified easily for higher power levels in the future. Superchargers are more expensive to upgrade for more power, if upgrades exist at all.

Same here. I know you can swap housings here and there and such. I don't think that's the same kind of option as changing rotors or a housing on a supercharger.

5. A supercharger's drive belt will stress the crankshaft and adjacent main bearing due to the additional strain of driving the supercharger, while turbochargers are widely regarded as being quite easy on engines. It is not unusual to see stock type engine components surviving at power levels of two to three times their stock output when turbocharging is employed!

Again - I've read this too and can't speak against it. I think that turbo' is more "gentle" as it doesn't shock the engine as much as a supercharger does. You do see a LOT of crazy horsepower numbers from turbo' cars too.

6. The TurboSystem will usually be easier to install, especially on four cylinder engines."

I'm not sure about V8s, but that's not a biggie for me either.

I'm by no means an expert, not have I gotten experience with either set-up. I hope I'm not coming off as argumentative; I just would like more answers and welcome any input. If this can be elaborated on by the original poster, he may converter a supercharger guy

I'll try here lol.

-500 hp to crank/ 450 hp to the wheel on turbo would be (this is just example because I do not know the real numbers and every SC app is probably different) 500 to crank/ 420 hp. SC is taking power from crank to power SC.(exhaust restriction is usually not factor, if it is you get bigger pipes.)

-You can change boost level on the fly in the car if you want. If you have bigger turbo and don't need the power for some reason, you don't have to tap into that power, you can just dial in boost controller if you have a map set up for it. I use to run 3 different maps, 1 for daily driving @ 24psi, 1 for if that Z06 pulled up next to me @ 28psi (both these on 93 oct.) and one set up for 116 race fuel @ 32psi. Never had to do anything but change my boost level with my electronic boost contoller! Just like that.

-Above explains why pulleys and belts is a pain compared to SC

-Again above explains how you can use what you want/need from turbo. Turbo size doesn't matter except for the potential of power. Thet all can be adjusted to power settings you need from tune/maps & boost controller.

-Yes, Turbos can feed more to the engine because it is a smoother transition instead of instant shock. In fact when you are just driving, you are using vacuum instead of boost, hence this is why you can go from aggressive to fuel economy just by how much gas you are giving. I doubt that you would see 27mph on the SS if they were SC, but I can guarantee that you can still have the fuel mileage ratings with turbo at with n/a engine. In fact after my set-up of adding 320hp to my evo, I got better fuel mileage,, amazing!

-As far as being easier, I am no mechanic and could not tell ya that. I would immagine a twin set-up would be a lil more complex, but I would say after initial set-up the turbo will have more capabilities and less labor.

So we will see how I did. I hope that helps and I'll be waiting to be told all the stuff I don't know or left out or overlooked. You know the routine lol.

I have owned a few turbo cars and 1 supercharged car, I like the turbo set-up better, but I also know that SC are getting better by the minute.

I am no expert mechanic, I just like driving them!



edit: after thinking about that, the crank numbers will be effected too with SC, to better put it it takes more work on the engine in SC app to get the same hp as a turbo.

[JJ#48Racing]

I'd rather supercharge, but if it was considerably less I'd consider a turbo.