What is Better
02-06-2008 | 03:44 PM
#2
Senior Member
Joined: 08-29-07
Posts: 3,811
Likes: 0
From: "Central", PA
Fact:
Turbos are more efficient. (I think thermally or something like that).
The Debate:
Superchargers are better because their is no lag.
As you see. Taking into consideration the efficiency of each and then weighing it against the price of lag is what makes this a personal preference in most instances. If you're talking about our cars in particular. The highest outputting (<not even a word...lol) 'balt on this site has a turbo. They definitely are easier to upgrade for power in most cases. The only time I know of superchargers being used for big gains is in muscle cars, but they have big engine bays so their modding options are pretty unlimited.
SRT-4's and MS3's use Turbos and they've been making huge numbers. Their just easier to make go fast for some reason.
Turbos are more efficient. (I think thermally or something like that).
The Debate:
Superchargers are better because their is no lag.
As you see. Taking into consideration the efficiency of each and then weighing it against the price of lag is what makes this a personal preference in most instances. If you're talking about our cars in particular. The highest outputting (<not even a word...lol) 'balt on this site has a turbo. They definitely are easier to upgrade for power in most cases. The only time I know of superchargers being used for big gains is in muscle cars, but they have big engine bays so their modding options are pretty unlimited.
SRT-4's and MS3's use Turbos and they've been making huge numbers. Their just easier to make go fast for some reason.
the LNF and the LSJ.. both 2.0s but not the same engine
02-06-2008 | 03:50 PM
#9
Thread Starter
Junior Member
Joined: 08-20-07
Posts: 452
Likes: 0
From: Norfolk, Va
lol if you like the sound but it does sound cool lol.
Oh ok thanks for clearing that up
Oh ok thanks for clearing that up
Last edited by HawkMThe; 02-06-2008 at 03:50 PM. Reason: Automerged Doublepost
02-06-2008 | 06:02 PM
#12
Not a Sebring
Joined: 02-22-07
Posts: 12,863
Likes: 2
From: Northern VA
I'm suprised no one mentioned that a supercharger actually has to use power from your engine to make power. Obviously, the gains heavily overweigh the losses.
Turbochargers are typically less reliable and more maintnence to up-keep. They can create more power in the end though.
So all in all I'd say a supercharger is more "practical", but a turbo will bring you more power in the long run, simply b/c they are easier to build off of. If you run out of power, you just move to a bigger turbo, and crank the boost up (if your motor is ready to take it).
Turbochargers are typically less reliable and more maintnence to up-keep. They can create more power in the end though.
So all in all I'd say a supercharger is more "practical", but a turbo will bring you more power in the long run, simply b/c they are easier to build off of. If you run out of power, you just move to a bigger turbo, and crank the boost up (if your motor is ready to take it).
02-06-2008 | 06:07 PM
#13
Senior Member
Joined: 05-16-06
Posts: 6,298
Likes: 0
From: CT
You also need to take into consideration that the easiest way to make power with a 4 banger is turbo. As far as V-8s go, pretty much any setup will open them way up. Not saying that you can't make pretty big power on a four with something like the TVS. (Hopefully soon we'll see what can be done 
)
)
02-06-2008 | 06:10 PM
#14
Senior Member
Joined: 08-09-07
Posts: 1,619
Likes: 0
From: minnesota
id say it depends on the application... 4 cylinders imo should never be supercharged (i love my ss/sc tho) on the other hand supercharged v-8's are sexy as hell and i wouldnt like it any other way.
turbochargers, are a PITA more tubing+more fabrication= more stuff to break. however if you looking for the power on our little 4-banger id say turbo is the way to go, sky is the limit. superchargers are limited by that little thing called parasitic loss....
again thats just my opinion
turbochargers, are a PITA more tubing+more fabrication= more stuff to break. however if you looking for the power on our little 4-banger id say turbo is the way to go, sky is the limit. superchargers are limited by that little thing called parasitic loss....
again thats just my opinion
02-06-2008 | 06:19 PM
#17
I like turbo... it fits on a license plate. Supercharger is too long. I always thought the turbo's were easily upgraded. Just swap out for a bigger turbo if needed... although I don't know much... I have a 2.2L
02-07-2008 | 06:07 AM
#19
really im not even sure you can say a turbo is more efficient. if your comparing it to a twin screw or a roots type, sure its more efficient...but what if your comparing it to a rotrex....i would think they have identical thermal efficiencies since they are compressing air using the same method
02-07-2008 | 06:19 AM
#20
Senior Member
Joined: 02-05-07
Posts: 1,745
Likes: 0
From: buffalo/ny
okay here we go...
supercharger creates boost off the line.
turbo is for top end, hence a turbo usually spikes around 6k which is when u generate the most boost.
its a very controversial topic. and it all depends on what ur building. alot of track cars like superchargers because u get that boost right off the line. the supercharger runs off the serpentine belt, which is what ur power steering, alternator etc runs off of. the biggest debate is people dont like superchargers because u have to use power to make power. while a turbo is separate and uses turbines to spin and send boost through. basically u have to read up, and see what u like better. IMO, i like turbos because i believe a supercharger is limited to how much power it can create. u can only do so much before ur topped out. I like the turbos on a four cylinder because its an awesome set-up. the 4 banger is small and can be suped up to generate lots of quick power. if i had a 6 cylinder i would deff recommend a supercharger because if u turbo a 6 cyl. by then time it spools up ur ready to shift. idk. i'll prob get flamed for my observations but thats my 2 cents.
supercharger creates boost off the line.
turbo is for top end, hence a turbo usually spikes around 6k which is when u generate the most boost.
its a very controversial topic. and it all depends on what ur building. alot of track cars like superchargers because u get that boost right off the line. the supercharger runs off the serpentine belt, which is what ur power steering, alternator etc runs off of. the biggest debate is people dont like superchargers because u have to use power to make power. while a turbo is separate and uses turbines to spin and send boost through. basically u have to read up, and see what u like better. IMO, i like turbos because i believe a supercharger is limited to how much power it can create. u can only do so much before ur topped out. I like the turbos on a four cylinder because its an awesome set-up. the 4 banger is small and can be suped up to generate lots of quick power. if i had a 6 cylinder i would deff recommend a supercharger because if u turbo a 6 cyl. by then time it spools up ur ready to shift. idk. i'll prob get flamed for my observations but thats my 2 cents.