NOS, Turbo, Supercharger???

[OxMox]

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.

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

 

[OxMox]

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.

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

 

[Engage47]

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

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 setups

 

[TMX]

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.

 

[Engage47]

im right there with you on the slammed affect from the turbo's, i just like bigger turbo setups with low boost (back pressure) lower boost with bigger turbo's beast high boost and smaller turbos with engine safety and longevity it might be more expensive for a pair of bigger turbo's but feels real nice knowing to go the extra power if need be

 

[OxMox]

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.

they have a TT set-up... so does a few other company's, but there very VERY expensive 8k$ +

 

[zincyellow03]

they have a TT set-up... so does a few other company's, but there very VERY expensive 8k$ +

Eh, what's $8k

 

[cobra232]

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 think you ment buicks are RWD

Cent blowers do not make near full boost throughout the range. they are RPM dependant and reach near max boost or max boost close to redline. i have one so please don't try to argue that point.

no supercharger has surpassed the efficiency of a proper turbo. it is impossible to do. at full boost an autorotor on a cobra takes 60hp to make that boost a turbo takes no HP to make boost as it is dependant on exhaust flow actually a proper sized turbo or blower will not fall off on numbers as they make more boost in higher revs than a positive displacement blower which is known to fall off on top

where are you getting your info at? mine is from build a few buick turbo's back in the day which respond identical to our 3.8's when turbo'd. basically because the ford 3.8 is a modified copy of the buick stage 1 engine. whatever works on a buick for turbocharging will make power the same way on the ford but the ford will make a little better power than the buick given identical setups are used

 

[cobra232]

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

i'm gonna take a stab and say you have never driven a PT Cruiser GT or SRT-4.

they are little animals and very hard to control off the line. they have more nutz down low than just about anything. virtually no lag is present. SVO's are a real good building point as are XR4Ti's. again not much lag and very good grunt.

the GNX already had balls and is pretty much fine stock as is an 86/87 turbo T or GN or 89 turbo Trans AM

Turbo's are the best power option out there and are no more tricky to tune than any other poweradder

 

[03v6]

Okay... im sorry to everyone i offended... i was just messin around... not tryin to start some serious ownage... plus pputkowski and integraholic aren't on here to back me up.



You are married and still use dickwad?

 

[Engage47]

maried only week and a half and still in that thing called junior college so with that in mind dickwad still works, besides would you rather i had used poopyhead cause that was my first choice?? it just rings of post adolesence attitude <rockin hat wish i had one id be the talk of the phsyc ward.

 

[cruisinV6]

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.

 

[TMX]

Not only that, but turbos do not pass smog tests in cali. Alot of the supercharger kits have CARB numbers, so they are 50 state legal. Wouldn't be suprised if Harris County (Houston) did that in Texas, kinda one reason I look at a supercharger for my car.

 

[Engage47]

All i know is after i saw the numbers that HP performance TT kits were putting down i just gotta have one

 

[cobra232]

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.

really.

just how many manufacturers use turbo's and how many use superchargers



Hmmmm.

turbo's
Subaru
Mitsu
Volvo
Saab
Chrysler
VW
Audi
Porsche
BMW

Superchargers
GM
Diamler Chrysler
Jaguar

not to mention every Diesel truck in the US is turbocharged not supercharged. and please don't say diesels are not good for supercharger use

 

[b52yellow]

wHAT ABOUT THE ladies,????? Where they @ ?????

 

[03v6]

wHAT ABOUT THE ladies,????? Where they @ ?????

wtf?

 

[silver_sn95_v6]

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)

 

[cobra232]

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)

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 power

Turbo's were developed by the germans as a way to introduce fuel/air mix faster to give rockets more thrust.

Chryslers still have a turbo in the lineup the PT cruiser in 2 levels 180hp and 230hp versions. dodge cummins turbo and liberty CRD turbo diesel. they have only 1 supercharged car the SRT-6 Crossfire basically a Mercedes 320SLK Compressor

ford currently does not have a supercharged car in the lineup but they still have the Powerstroke turbo diesel. Jaguar and Astin Martin divisions of ford uses supercharging but their volvo division uses turbo's and their european and australian market fords use turbo's mostly. Land Rover uses supercharging
the rest of the worlds manufacturers use turbo's beacuse they make the best power and fuel efficiency compared to parasitic superchargers

the mitsu Evo isn't a good example of manners. it wasn't meant for that neither was the STI subie. they have gobs of harsh torque on tap ready to be unleashed and keep coming even when you let off. they take a while to get used to

yes superchargers for the most part have CARB #'s for cali emissions and most turbo kits don't because they are made by smaller companies that haven't applied for a CARB # but in the rest of the 50states for the most part can have a turbo kit on a car as long as it passes emissions which is easy to do, just lean it out abit for testing

 

[TMX]

Mustang Cobra, GT500 (not in production yet or not anymore), and the Ford GT are supercharged.

As for turbos, a Swiss guy came up with a design, but nothing was done with it. Then in the 1910's, General Electric started making turbochargers, and put one on a biplane in the 1920s. Then in 1936, Garret comes along and makes an aftercooler, so they had turbo B-17s with aftercoolers.