Pretty good read on turbos vs. s/c'ers
07-26-2009, 05:55 PM
#1
On The Tree
Thread Starter
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: DA SUCK,
Posts: 198
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Pretty good read on turbos vs. s/c'ers Sorry if this is a re-post
Why the Turbo?
We contend that the turbocharger is the superior part with respect to all forced induction mechanisms.
Power
The turbo will always have the power advantage due to the fact that it requires less power from the engine to drive it than any belt driven supercharger. Belt driven superchargers siphon off between 8% and 20% of the crank power, depending on circumstances. The turbo only steals 2% to 3% from the crank, and gets the rest from the wasted heat and flow energy of the exhaust. Why give up 10% if you don’t have to? Would 10% be the difference between winning and losing?
Durability
Two areas establish the turbo as a highly durable mechanism; the trucking industry and the 24 hour Le Mans Endurance Race. Just call truck repair facilities for the first category of information. Le Mans is a different matter. Porsche has publically stated that their engineering department considers street versus race wear rates as 1000 to 1. While perhaps a little high, one needs to assemble really good data to dispute Porsche. Regardless, consider that this race covers 3,500 miles in 24 hours. Porsche says this is equivalent to 3,500,000 street miles and its also done without an oil change. The race has been won by a turbocharged car in the majority of events in the last 40 years. Please note that the factory team of Cadillac racers were all turbocharged. So, what does it take for you to have a reliable turbo? Two things: use a top notch synthetic oil and change it every 5000 miles.
Low RPM boost
Either low rpm boost is really not that desirable, or there are lots of centrifugal supercharger users that have been fooling themselves. All other things being equal, the proper turbo makes all of it boost before the centrifugal makes much of its boost. Ask yourself if you would prefer 10psi of intercooled turbo boost at 3000 rpm, or 3psi from the centrifugal supercharger. It is easy to imagine which is pulling harder at that point. Why is this so? How does the turbo do that, particularly when they share the same style compressor? Easy again; the turbo can speed up relative to the crankshaft, the centrifugal supercharger cannot. You will be mightily impressed with the performance of a centrifugal compressor when it is allowed to speed up prior to the engine.
Economy
The turbo enjoys approximately a 10% economy advantage. Reason being; parasitic drag. When the fuel costs eventually get high enough, I’ll wager that every supercharger maker in the world will be frantically designing and tooling up to build a turbo.
Throttle Response
It is common for someone who has never driven a turbocharged car to complain about the lack of throttle response due to turbo lag. While this is a dumb position to get caught in, it is also the wrong information. When the driver of the Turbo 5.0 applies throttle, there is actually a small amount of boost in the system at that instant. With a small amount of boost available to push its way into the manifold, rather than just atmospheric pressure, the driver will notice a small, but perceptible improvement in throttle response. With all of the advances in bearings, compressor and turbine design, housing design and engine management, turbo lag has become a non-issue.
Now, to dispel the Myths!
But I can’t stand the lag. Just answer one basic question. If you are cruising along at 3000 revs and decide to nail the throttle, would you prefer the minimal boost the centrifugal will “instantly” offer, or the 10psi that the turbo will reach in less than one second? If you are cruising at 5000 rpm’s where the CS can actually make some boost, but not yet its maximum, its response is no faster than the turbo. Rest assured that with a turbo, at a cruise of 5000 revs, you can’t get your foot to the floor and off again without the turbo reaching full boost. The CS will respond quickly too, but it won’t reach full boost. That number is reserved for the absolute redline.
But turbos are hard to install!
The idea that one type of system is simpler to install and therefore better is not sound logic, if the more complex system has offsetting merit. Consider that ten extra hours spent installing a superior system quickly fades from importance if one drives this thing for a couple years and enjoys that difference everyday. Struggling without an intercooler and without a proper fuel system for two years makes 10 more hours up front seem like a bargain. And it is a bargain.
The fabled turbo heat problem.
Invariably a supercharger salesman will point to the turbo and flatly state that when it is glowing red hot, it will melt everything under the hood. The problem is knowledge and integrity, not the turbo. Iron and steel begin to glow red at around 1100 F. The stock exhaust gas temperature is well in excess of that, thus the stock exhaust manifold glows when the car is driven hard. No damage is done in the stock condition and none will be done by the turbo.
The turbo doesn't have any power.
Although we would like to tout power with quotes of enormous numbers, the power is really going to be what you make of it. Heads, manifolds, cams, exhausts, boost pressures, turbo sizes, all have such a huge influence on power, that naming a specific output is utter folly. However, you may rest assured that whatever preparation path, if any, that you take with the engine, the turbo will provide substantially more power than any other form of forced induction. Flexibility of power improvements Unlike any other boost maker, the turbo can be made to change boost at the flip of a switch. Boost can be changed in the middle of a drag race if so desired. Try that trick with anything else. Boost can be made to run as low as 3 psi at full throttle, or well past 30 psi, but the success will always lie with keeping the boost consistent with the engine preparation
Why the Turbo?
We contend that the turbocharger is the superior part with respect to all forced induction mechanisms.
Power
The turbo will always have the power advantage due to the fact that it requires less power from the engine to drive it than any belt driven supercharger. Belt driven superchargers siphon off between 8% and 20% of the crank power, depending on circumstances. The turbo only steals 2% to 3% from the crank, and gets the rest from the wasted heat and flow energy of the exhaust. Why give up 10% if you don’t have to? Would 10% be the difference between winning and losing?
Durability
Two areas establish the turbo as a highly durable mechanism; the trucking industry and the 24 hour Le Mans Endurance Race. Just call truck repair facilities for the first category of information. Le Mans is a different matter. Porsche has publically stated that their engineering department considers street versus race wear rates as 1000 to 1. While perhaps a little high, one needs to assemble really good data to dispute Porsche. Regardless, consider that this race covers 3,500 miles in 24 hours. Porsche says this is equivalent to 3,500,000 street miles and its also done without an oil change. The race has been won by a turbocharged car in the majority of events in the last 40 years. Please note that the factory team of Cadillac racers were all turbocharged. So, what does it take for you to have a reliable turbo? Two things: use a top notch synthetic oil and change it every 5000 miles.
Low RPM boost
Either low rpm boost is really not that desirable, or there are lots of centrifugal supercharger users that have been fooling themselves. All other things being equal, the proper turbo makes all of it boost before the centrifugal makes much of its boost. Ask yourself if you would prefer 10psi of intercooled turbo boost at 3000 rpm, or 3psi from the centrifugal supercharger. It is easy to imagine which is pulling harder at that point. Why is this so? How does the turbo do that, particularly when they share the same style compressor? Easy again; the turbo can speed up relative to the crankshaft, the centrifugal supercharger cannot. You will be mightily impressed with the performance of a centrifugal compressor when it is allowed to speed up prior to the engine.
Economy
The turbo enjoys approximately a 10% economy advantage. Reason being; parasitic drag. When the fuel costs eventually get high enough, I’ll wager that every supercharger maker in the world will be frantically designing and tooling up to build a turbo.
Throttle Response
It is common for someone who has never driven a turbocharged car to complain about the lack of throttle response due to turbo lag. While this is a dumb position to get caught in, it is also the wrong information. When the driver of the Turbo 5.0 applies throttle, there is actually a small amount of boost in the system at that instant. With a small amount of boost available to push its way into the manifold, rather than just atmospheric pressure, the driver will notice a small, but perceptible improvement in throttle response. With all of the advances in bearings, compressor and turbine design, housing design and engine management, turbo lag has become a non-issue.
Now, to dispel the Myths!
But I can’t stand the lag. Just answer one basic question. If you are cruising along at 3000 revs and decide to nail the throttle, would you prefer the minimal boost the centrifugal will “instantly” offer, or the 10psi that the turbo will reach in less than one second? If you are cruising at 5000 rpm’s where the CS can actually make some boost, but not yet its maximum, its response is no faster than the turbo. Rest assured that with a turbo, at a cruise of 5000 revs, you can’t get your foot to the floor and off again without the turbo reaching full boost. The CS will respond quickly too, but it won’t reach full boost. That number is reserved for the absolute redline.
But turbos are hard to install!
The idea that one type of system is simpler to install and therefore better is not sound logic, if the more complex system has offsetting merit. Consider that ten extra hours spent installing a superior system quickly fades from importance if one drives this thing for a couple years and enjoys that difference everyday. Struggling without an intercooler and without a proper fuel system for two years makes 10 more hours up front seem like a bargain. And it is a bargain.
The fabled turbo heat problem.
Invariably a supercharger salesman will point to the turbo and flatly state that when it is glowing red hot, it will melt everything under the hood. The problem is knowledge and integrity, not the turbo. Iron and steel begin to glow red at around 1100 F. The stock exhaust gas temperature is well in excess of that, thus the stock exhaust manifold glows when the car is driven hard. No damage is done in the stock condition and none will be done by the turbo.
The turbo doesn't have any power.
Although we would like to tout power with quotes of enormous numbers, the power is really going to be what you make of it. Heads, manifolds, cams, exhausts, boost pressures, turbo sizes, all have such a huge influence on power, that naming a specific output is utter folly. However, you may rest assured that whatever preparation path, if any, that you take with the engine, the turbo will provide substantially more power than any other form of forced induction. Flexibility of power improvements Unlike any other boost maker, the turbo can be made to change boost at the flip of a switch. Boost can be changed in the middle of a drag race if so desired. Try that trick with anything else. Boost can be made to run as low as 3 psi at full throttle, or well past 30 psi, but the success will always lie with keeping the boost consistent with the engine preparation
07-26-2009, 08:55 PM
#5
Just from reading that:
1. It is extremely bias
2. It doesn't sound like it was written by an engineer of any significance, or they lack communication skills.
3. False information. Example: Turbo lag is basically non existent for big CI motors, true, but you go tell some of those EVO guys that turbo lag doesn't exist and they'll smack you.
Most of the fastest cars on this board are turbo cars, and turbos are no joke, but to dismiss superchargers based on that write up is ludicrous.
1. It is extremely bias
2. It doesn't sound like it was written by an engineer of any significance, or they lack communication skills.
3. False information. Example: Turbo lag is basically non existent for big CI motors, true, but you go tell some of those EVO guys that turbo lag doesn't exist and they'll smack you.
Most of the fastest cars on this board are turbo cars, and turbos are no joke, but to dismiss superchargers based on that write up is ludicrous.
Trending Topics
07-26-2009, 10:33 PM
#9
On The Tree
Thread Starter
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: DA SUCK,
Posts: 198
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
sounds pretty consistent with what ive heard on other threads, here is a pretty bias s/c rebuttal.. also a good read!
Let me begin by making very clear that I share the following only because I was asked to and in doing so these are my feelings and opinions based on 40 years of massaging and owning FI (forced induction gals); nothing more.
Having set the stages for the following I will now share that I have been a supercharger advocate since I was a little kid; there was always something captivating about the look, the sound, and (in the early days) multi V belts that were quickly replaced with large square cog and or the v groove metric equivalent of today. IMO nothing said/says power quite like a huge fricken supercharger.
Now as the years rolled by I continued to massage many gals within the FI (forced induction arena) both as supercharged and turbo charged gals; I like them both however I continue to be drawn to superchargers because no matter what the cost to operate one; meaning the calculated parasitic loss which frankly means NADA to me as it IMO is akin justifying the cost of admission to any arena; business, playing, etc. it is what is and to attempt to use this as a basis of how inefficient it is makes me smile; see you at the finish line and we can discuss it there because the net results regardless of the parasitic loss is always more power and if it is a roots style (not a centrifugal aka Vortex, Paxton, etc.) supercharger the grunt down low aka torque can be absolutely phenomenal. I am speaking of tire shredding torque which for the purpose of this example has nothing to do with the extrapolated number referred to as horsepower; a number that frankly too many toss around not truly understanding what it means other than if it is a bigger number it must be better; this sadly is not the case. I refer to this number as the lapel pin number and only one step away from something that PT Barnum would sell (smoke and mirrors) because it takes torque to move the machine and IMO the more the better and then at some point in time the calculated horsepower comes into play as she continues her quest while she is fighting off the wall aka head of air being creating in front of her.
I shared this with the following understanding; I spend the greatest portion of my time operating my gals from a static position up to 100 MPH and then there are those moments in time that I like to stretch their legs into the extreme MPH arena however the later is not where we live/play most of the time.
A supercharged gal presents me with raw, visceral, consistent power every time I operate the go-pedal however IMO the turbo systems as presently integrated into the Ford GT’s do not. In fact a turbo gal can and will surprise you because the increase in power is based on numerous operational variables of which all are not able to be controlled all of the time. For example; if traversing an area full of twisties in a supercharged gal you can anticipate what will happen next as you massage the go-pedal however in the turbo gals as designed today I dare say that you could very well be operating the go-pedal and then out of the fricken blue the turbos kick in and it becomes OMG; not exactly my idea of fun.
Let’s use another example; what I refer to as puddle jumping; meaning darting away from a stop light only to be met by another a block or two away. In this example when the light turns green I press the go-pedal and immediately at my disposal is huge tire shredding torque that is progressively building out of the proverbial gate; now whether I elect to use it is at my discretion however it is available whereas if in a turbo’d gal this torque is not available; this is unless I prepare myself for this moment in time by power braking the gal so as to get the turbos to spool up otherwise when I press the go-pedal she is IMO flat; in fact somewhat anemic.
So now I need to come back to center so as not to let this become a supercharger rallying call as it is not; I will make very clear that I enjoy boosted gals whether supercharged or turbo’d; and likely would also enjoy those where the packages have been combined however IMO each offers a completely different style of power and set the stages for a different driving style and furthermore my comments are based on the current offerings and not what I think could be if enough time and money was spent.
The supercharger is raw and visceral from low down up to maximum rev limit and once the pull is initiated the power will feel very linear because boost is constantly building; meaning there will be no surges in power but rather a strong pull all the way through however nearing the end of the pull sadly the supercharger will begin to show its age (after all by design it is not only old but being used to compress rather than scavenge air) as it will run out of breath and in fact over time will become over heated and be able to perform at the same level unless given time to cool down; this is the nature of the beast and even liquid intercooled has removed a component of supercharged gals. The supercharged gals use a by-pass valve to release pressure under deceleration so as to make the transition from boost to vacuum smooth rather as a device to control the amount of boost allowed; meaning the supercharger anabolic efficiency combined with the rotor spin rate will create a measurable result which can be altered by swapping pulley sizes hence changing the amount of air being moved at any given moment in time.
The turbo is IMO more sly; maybe even a bit silky smooth in the sense that unless as shared earlier one imitates a pull by power braking will give you a false sense of control over the go-pedal meaning if you simply initiate a pull by pressing the go-pedal it will take time for the power to build because this is a by-product of the impeller speed and the housing design as well as the relationship with the waste gate and then out of the blue the turbos kick in whether you are ready for them or not. When designing a turbo system one of the primary goals is to get the turbo to spool up as quickly as possible as such impeller size, weight, design, and housings are combined always attempting to find the “Holy Grail” and yet not so small so as to choke the system once the gal is in the big end arena of her power band or she will run short on air; sadly there are very few aftermarket tuners that successfully find this balancing act but rather an present their system as completed with an endless array of operational/performance compromises based on design flaws and then sold as normal. Now unlike the supercharger the pressure dumping device on a turbo gal is referred to as a waste gate; the term specifically states “waste” as the compressed air being generated by the turbo is not needed to maintain a predetermined boost level as such it is allowed to escape. Whereas a supercharger will build boost over time a turbo gal in the optimum situation will create a predetermined boost (hopefully very quickly) and then maintain the same level of boost throughout the pull; if one wants more boost (in the old days we used to shim the spring on the waste gate) today they use one of the many electronic devices that micro manage the waste gate. Now if one is successful when designing the system so that the turbo spools extremely quickly and then are large enough to still push sufficient air on the big end then mechanically speaking the “Holy Grail” will have been found however (I share this with no disrespect to the turbo systems presently integrated in the Ford GT’s) this is not the case. IMO the turbos are not properly placed, too far from the head, and the list goes on as such what all have are high horsepower gals capable of cutting through the air at extreme speeds more efficiently than any of the supercharged Ford GT’s and yet lack the low end grunt and torque through the lower and early mid section thus making them “less” fun to drive.
Now this brings me to the supercharger and turbo combination systems; now long before they were offered for sale Torrie, TonY G, and myself toyed with setup and tested it because on paper and then confirmed by real time dyno results as measured with Torrie’s gal we had stunning success however as with most success a price was to be paid. The discharge air temperatures created as the direct result of this combination were through the roof and IMO as well as the others involved with the testing agreed that the combination was good for little more that the ultimate puddle jumper; the scenario that I described above. Now I have to also say that I am a mechanical junkie and the mere idea of tossing open the clamshell to be presented with not only a supercharger but also a pair of turbos would make my legs weak however if the gal were to be used on the track, for a mile run, or for that matter anything more than brief gear blast it would become the law of diminishing returns and she will not survive; on this I have no doubt or I would have the combination on my gal as this IMO would be the ultimate statement of power. In as much as I share this and my enthusiasm for it; it was mechanically a patchwork quilt. It was taking the supercharger for it low end torque and then as it begins to run out of breath having a pair of turbos help it breath a bit more and longer however sadly and mechanically by this point in time the operational damage aka the excessive discharge air temperature had already been created by the supercharger as such the net benefit of the turbos IMO became little more than a moderately increased horsepower number; a number that means very little because in the end the gal will not survive in those conditions.
Let me begin by making very clear that I share the following only because I was asked to and in doing so these are my feelings and opinions based on 40 years of massaging and owning FI (forced induction gals); nothing more.
Having set the stages for the following I will now share that I have been a supercharger advocate since I was a little kid; there was always something captivating about the look, the sound, and (in the early days) multi V belts that were quickly replaced with large square cog and or the v groove metric equivalent of today. IMO nothing said/says power quite like a huge fricken supercharger.
Now as the years rolled by I continued to massage many gals within the FI (forced induction arena) both as supercharged and turbo charged gals; I like them both however I continue to be drawn to superchargers because no matter what the cost to operate one; meaning the calculated parasitic loss which frankly means NADA to me as it IMO is akin justifying the cost of admission to any arena; business, playing, etc. it is what is and to attempt to use this as a basis of how inefficient it is makes me smile; see you at the finish line and we can discuss it there because the net results regardless of the parasitic loss is always more power and if it is a roots style (not a centrifugal aka Vortex, Paxton, etc.) supercharger the grunt down low aka torque can be absolutely phenomenal. I am speaking of tire shredding torque which for the purpose of this example has nothing to do with the extrapolated number referred to as horsepower; a number that frankly too many toss around not truly understanding what it means other than if it is a bigger number it must be better; this sadly is not the case. I refer to this number as the lapel pin number and only one step away from something that PT Barnum would sell (smoke and mirrors) because it takes torque to move the machine and IMO the more the better and then at some point in time the calculated horsepower comes into play as she continues her quest while she is fighting off the wall aka head of air being creating in front of her.
I shared this with the following understanding; I spend the greatest portion of my time operating my gals from a static position up to 100 MPH and then there are those moments in time that I like to stretch their legs into the extreme MPH arena however the later is not where we live/play most of the time.
A supercharged gal presents me with raw, visceral, consistent power every time I operate the go-pedal however IMO the turbo systems as presently integrated into the Ford GT’s do not. In fact a turbo gal can and will surprise you because the increase in power is based on numerous operational variables of which all are not able to be controlled all of the time. For example; if traversing an area full of twisties in a supercharged gal you can anticipate what will happen next as you massage the go-pedal however in the turbo gals as designed today I dare say that you could very well be operating the go-pedal and then out of the fricken blue the turbos kick in and it becomes OMG; not exactly my idea of fun.
Let’s use another example; what I refer to as puddle jumping; meaning darting away from a stop light only to be met by another a block or two away. In this example when the light turns green I press the go-pedal and immediately at my disposal is huge tire shredding torque that is progressively building out of the proverbial gate; now whether I elect to use it is at my discretion however it is available whereas if in a turbo’d gal this torque is not available; this is unless I prepare myself for this moment in time by power braking the gal so as to get the turbos to spool up otherwise when I press the go-pedal she is IMO flat; in fact somewhat anemic.
So now I need to come back to center so as not to let this become a supercharger rallying call as it is not; I will make very clear that I enjoy boosted gals whether supercharged or turbo’d; and likely would also enjoy those where the packages have been combined however IMO each offers a completely different style of power and set the stages for a different driving style and furthermore my comments are based on the current offerings and not what I think could be if enough time and money was spent.
The supercharger is raw and visceral from low down up to maximum rev limit and once the pull is initiated the power will feel very linear because boost is constantly building; meaning there will be no surges in power but rather a strong pull all the way through however nearing the end of the pull sadly the supercharger will begin to show its age (after all by design it is not only old but being used to compress rather than scavenge air) as it will run out of breath and in fact over time will become over heated and be able to perform at the same level unless given time to cool down; this is the nature of the beast and even liquid intercooled has removed a component of supercharged gals. The supercharged gals use a by-pass valve to release pressure under deceleration so as to make the transition from boost to vacuum smooth rather as a device to control the amount of boost allowed; meaning the supercharger anabolic efficiency combined with the rotor spin rate will create a measurable result which can be altered by swapping pulley sizes hence changing the amount of air being moved at any given moment in time.
The turbo is IMO more sly; maybe even a bit silky smooth in the sense that unless as shared earlier one imitates a pull by power braking will give you a false sense of control over the go-pedal meaning if you simply initiate a pull by pressing the go-pedal it will take time for the power to build because this is a by-product of the impeller speed and the housing design as well as the relationship with the waste gate and then out of the blue the turbos kick in whether you are ready for them or not. When designing a turbo system one of the primary goals is to get the turbo to spool up as quickly as possible as such impeller size, weight, design, and housings are combined always attempting to find the “Holy Grail” and yet not so small so as to choke the system once the gal is in the big end arena of her power band or she will run short on air; sadly there are very few aftermarket tuners that successfully find this balancing act but rather an present their system as completed with an endless array of operational/performance compromises based on design flaws and then sold as normal. Now unlike the supercharger the pressure dumping device on a turbo gal is referred to as a waste gate; the term specifically states “waste” as the compressed air being generated by the turbo is not needed to maintain a predetermined boost level as such it is allowed to escape. Whereas a supercharger will build boost over time a turbo gal in the optimum situation will create a predetermined boost (hopefully very quickly) and then maintain the same level of boost throughout the pull; if one wants more boost (in the old days we used to shim the spring on the waste gate) today they use one of the many electronic devices that micro manage the waste gate. Now if one is successful when designing the system so that the turbo spools extremely quickly and then are large enough to still push sufficient air on the big end then mechanically speaking the “Holy Grail” will have been found however (I share this with no disrespect to the turbo systems presently integrated in the Ford GT’s) this is not the case. IMO the turbos are not properly placed, too far from the head, and the list goes on as such what all have are high horsepower gals capable of cutting through the air at extreme speeds more efficiently than any of the supercharged Ford GT’s and yet lack the low end grunt and torque through the lower and early mid section thus making them “less” fun to drive.
Now this brings me to the supercharger and turbo combination systems; now long before they were offered for sale Torrie, TonY G, and myself toyed with setup and tested it because on paper and then confirmed by real time dyno results as measured with Torrie’s gal we had stunning success however as with most success a price was to be paid. The discharge air temperatures created as the direct result of this combination were through the roof and IMO as well as the others involved with the testing agreed that the combination was good for little more that the ultimate puddle jumper; the scenario that I described above. Now I have to also say that I am a mechanical junkie and the mere idea of tossing open the clamshell to be presented with not only a supercharger but also a pair of turbos would make my legs weak however if the gal were to be used on the track, for a mile run, or for that matter anything more than brief gear blast it would become the law of diminishing returns and she will not survive; on this I have no doubt or I would have the combination on my gal as this IMO would be the ultimate statement of power. In as much as I share this and my enthusiasm for it; it was mechanically a patchwork quilt. It was taking the supercharger for it low end torque and then as it begins to run out of breath having a pair of turbos help it breath a bit more and longer however sadly and mechanically by this point in time the operational damage aka the excessive discharge air temperature had already been created by the supercharger as such the net benefit of the turbos IMO became little more than a moderately increased horsepower number; a number that means very little because in the end the gal will not survive in those conditions.
07-26-2009, 10:34 PM
#10
On The Tree
Thread Starter
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: DA SUCK,
Posts: 198
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
con't>>>
So what is the answer; this can only be shared after the following question is answered.
If you want to run the mile and have the most significant big end number then the edge goes to the turbo however for normal day to day driving you must then accept an anemic low end power band unless you either learn to and consistently power brake or always operate her in the sub 4000 RPM range.
If you want bodacious torque at your disposal from the moment you bring her to life whether you drive your gal on the street, moderate track usage, and at the mile knowing that a number not much greater than 200 MPH is what you can experience then the edge goes to the supercharger
If you are a mechanical junky and like myself enjoy the mechanics of the supercharger and turbo combination and clearly understand that in this configuration she will certainly be the ultimate tire shredder while also accepting her operations limitation based on the inefficient system design then the edge goes to the supercharger and turbo combination.
However if you want the “Holy Grail” then quit purchasing the systems as presented and force someone to create a system from a clean piece of paper not using space constraints and finances as key limitations and I dare say that the results would be out of this world.
Keep in mind; any gal designed to operate on pump gal will have combustion limitations as such even the “Holy Grail” will not greatly exceed the measured numbers as presently solicited but rather the power could become available sooner and remain available for a much longer period of time.
Now I am a huge fan of nitro Top Fuel gals even though today the rules are such that the real design envelope is no longer pushed; it is a tuners game with the playing field all but leveled except for the cash that one is willing/able to spend and these folks elect to spin the tightest most efficient superchargers in the world and the resulting power is beyond visceral however they only do so for 1000 feet so this brings me immediately back to the question “what is the best answer” to which you first have to define her usage and your expectations.
I encourage that you do not get sucked into a horsepower power sales pitch because it is “NOT” a reflection of how much power is being made but rather a measurement of an extremely small moment in time and even less how much fun she will be to drive. I know a few folks that have both supercharged and turbo gals and all have said the same thing to me; “my supercharged gal is more responsive and enjoyable to drive and yet when I want the ultimate top speed rush the turbo gal makes me smile”.
In closing let me reiterate that I truly mean not to offend anyone and even less I do not want discourage anyone from their quest but rather I have taken this time to share “my thoughts” and as I say; "if the shoe fits wear it" and if not I hope that you enjoyed the read and garnered something from it; even if only a little insight about the “Shadowman”
So what is the answer; this can only be shared after the following question is answered.
If you want to run the mile and have the most significant big end number then the edge goes to the turbo however for normal day to day driving you must then accept an anemic low end power band unless you either learn to and consistently power brake or always operate her in the sub 4000 RPM range.
If you want bodacious torque at your disposal from the moment you bring her to life whether you drive your gal on the street, moderate track usage, and at the mile knowing that a number not much greater than 200 MPH is what you can experience then the edge goes to the supercharger
If you are a mechanical junky and like myself enjoy the mechanics of the supercharger and turbo combination and clearly understand that in this configuration she will certainly be the ultimate tire shredder while also accepting her operations limitation based on the inefficient system design then the edge goes to the supercharger and turbo combination.
However if you want the “Holy Grail” then quit purchasing the systems as presented and force someone to create a system from a clean piece of paper not using space constraints and finances as key limitations and I dare say that the results would be out of this world.
Keep in mind; any gal designed to operate on pump gal will have combustion limitations as such even the “Holy Grail” will not greatly exceed the measured numbers as presently solicited but rather the power could become available sooner and remain available for a much longer period of time.
Now I am a huge fan of nitro Top Fuel gals even though today the rules are such that the real design envelope is no longer pushed; it is a tuners game with the playing field all but leveled except for the cash that one is willing/able to spend and these folks elect to spin the tightest most efficient superchargers in the world and the resulting power is beyond visceral however they only do so for 1000 feet so this brings me immediately back to the question “what is the best answer” to which you first have to define her usage and your expectations.
I encourage that you do not get sucked into a horsepower power sales pitch because it is “NOT” a reflection of how much power is being made but rather a measurement of an extremely small moment in time and even less how much fun she will be to drive. I know a few folks that have both supercharged and turbo gals and all have said the same thing to me; “my supercharged gal is more responsive and enjoyable to drive and yet when I want the ultimate top speed rush the turbo gal makes me smile”.
In closing let me reiterate that I truly mean not to offend anyone and even less I do not want discourage anyone from their quest but rather I have taken this time to share “my thoughts” and as I say; "if the shoe fits wear it" and if not I hope that you enjoyed the read and garnered something from it; even if only a little insight about the “Shadowman”
07-27-2009, 12:12 AM
#12
TECH Addict
iTrader: (8)
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: toronto ontario canada
Posts: 2,047
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes
on
2 Posts
i love turbo cars and not really that much into blowers, but i hate when people just point out the upsides on one and not the other. yes turbos will always be more efficient, but how can you ignore the instant boost/torque curve from a twin screw
07-27-2009, 01:09 AM
#13
Thats very biased and sounds like a sales pitch for a turbo company! lol....I didnt even finish reading it because it sounds like a load...and I'm pretty sure most supercharger apps are much simpler and more durable then turbos...yes turbos are very serious contenders in their proper trim but supers are just as much when set up as well!
