Any turbo guys wish they had gone with a blower, or vice versa?
04-09-2004, 01:36 AM
#21
TECH Senior Member
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Chi-Town, IL
Posts: 11,603
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I'm not satisfied with my supercharger setup yet, I hope it all works out so I can finally enjoy the boost instead of having to deal with bullshit problems all the time......
If I had to do it over again, I would of went turbo for sure
I still probably will in the future.......
If I had to do it over again, I would of went turbo for sure
I still probably will in the future....... 
04-10-2004, 02:23 AM
#25
Well I think I will chime in.Very interested in turbo cars but never had one till recently.Picked up a turbo talon 1992 for some all season fun awd of course.I have already started modded it and its pretty easy to get the little 4 bangers to over 500 engine hp with fairly cheap upgrade bolt on turbos..heck can get like 650 plus.
and there are talons in the 8s and this is a 4 banger that weighs around 3000 or a bit less.
Gale banks and granatelli and others were putting out 1200 hp cars in the 80s and 1600 hp big blocks.Twin turbo of course.You won't see any supercharged cars putting out those kind of numbers.They could mabye do it on alternative fuels but not on street cars.Turbos just make way way more power.Enough they have been banned from various motorsports at various times.
Now the main problem seems to be that everyone turbos an ls1 with too high an compression.With forged parts and say 8 to 1 and 30psi you should see huge numbers with some of the new turbos out there.And the newest ball bearing ones can spool much much faster than the older ones really reducing turbo lag.
If I didn't have so many project cars I would for sure build a twin turbo ls1 beast and wouldn't make the mistake of high compression and low boost.But not totally sure how low you can get the ls1 down to with current piston and head offerings.That 8 to 8.5 range works very well on the talons.
and there are talons in the 8s and this is a 4 banger that weighs around 3000 or a bit less.
Gale banks and granatelli and others were putting out 1200 hp cars in the 80s and 1600 hp big blocks.Twin turbo of course.You won't see any supercharged cars putting out those kind of numbers.They could mabye do it on alternative fuels but not on street cars.Turbos just make way way more power.Enough they have been banned from various motorsports at various times.
Now the main problem seems to be that everyone turbos an ls1 with too high an compression.With forged parts and say 8 to 1 and 30psi you should see huge numbers with some of the new turbos out there.And the newest ball bearing ones can spool much much faster than the older ones really reducing turbo lag.
If I didn't have so many project cars I would for sure build a twin turbo ls1 beast and wouldn't make the mistake of high compression and low boost.But not totally sure how low you can get the ls1 down to with current piston and head offerings.That 8 to 8.5 range works very well on the talons.
04-10-2004, 01:30 PM
#26
TECH Enthusiast
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 689
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I have no regrets going turbo. Sure, it was a lot more money initially than slapping a D2R on my car, but the first time you roll into the throttle, hear the jet-like sound of turbos spooling, and feel the massive thrust of instant torque slam you into your seat, you never want to go centrifugal again!
04-10-2004, 10:11 PM
#27
Launching!
iTrader: (3)
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Wilmington, NC
Posts: 281
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
little of topic, but I took a ride in a 750 rwhp Supra.. after that i knew nothing but a turbo was gonna satisfy! you simply are introduced to an entirely different realm of performance with a Turbo vehicle.. the acceleration is unmatched for a street driven car and dialed in, a full out drag car is sure to be disgustingly fast.. i would think a lightened 1000 RWHP car would be borderline scary to take through a full pass in the quarter!
Chris
Chris
I have to agree with eviltwins post above. 
01-30-2005, 06:26 AM
#32
Well nice to see this thread brought back to life.I am now in a personal postion to buy a rear mount turbo kit for my 99 trans am.I would be running their 8psi setup for now on meth and likey getting a new turbo cam from lingenfelter the gt 2 -3 or the new gt 7.I would probably add some heads next year or possibly this year going with large chambers so could run maybe 10psi with the drop in compression.Forged would happen but likely not for a year or two unless the engine went.Thinking their one up turbo for now..gt 67.supposed to support 750 engine I think it was.
I have a buddy that works at speed shop ,he just got the procharger for his third gen.He is pushing hard to get me to go procharger.He referred me to there chart on their site comparing the different systems and he still argues the fastest cars on the track are running them.
I didn't really know what to say to him.I know a few sts cars have run 11.7 or so ,one in gto and another in camaro forget if that one was lt1 car though and there is that low 12 second sts truck.
I would think on the street the turbo car should easily win over the supercharger especially centrifical ones as the turbo will be at full boost say at 3000 and hold it to redline.The super increases with rpm and would think you would need more downshifting to get the super on boost if you were crusing around in third or fifth for example.Turbo cars can also benefit from a downshift here and there just dont' need to get to 6000 on them to be into full boost.
I think a lot of prochargers theory of turbo exhuast restriction is baloney and
they say they aren't very streetable yet oem has made and still makes turbo cars including the awesome sl600 mercedes.Porche twin turbo,etc.
Also how can procharger have more area under the curves when the turbo goes full boost at 3000 say ?I have found several turbo dyno graphs but not any supercharger ones on stock ls1 cars ,maybe they have some on the procharger site,didn't look that close.Still I see some great numbers from the ati cars at the track.
I still think going with the sts kit for now and hoping its impressive.I think it will be my talon impresses me a lot and not even running it at near what it could run for boost as need a big front mount intercooler to do that right although did also get a water/alco injection kit that also needs to be installed.
Maybe some of the problems with fast turbo cars is there is so much power at such low rpm that it causes massive control and traction problems.The supers do hit softer and more linear.I would think turbo hit can be compared to spray.Its all in very quick and stays there till redline.But the bottle never goes empty.
I have a buddy that works at speed shop ,he just got the procharger for his third gen.He is pushing hard to get me to go procharger.He referred me to there chart on their site comparing the different systems and he still argues the fastest cars on the track are running them.
I didn't really know what to say to him.I know a few sts cars have run 11.7 or so ,one in gto and another in camaro forget if that one was lt1 car though and there is that low 12 second sts truck.
I would think on the street the turbo car should easily win over the supercharger especially centrifical ones as the turbo will be at full boost say at 3000 and hold it to redline.The super increases with rpm and would think you would need more downshifting to get the super on boost if you were crusing around in third or fifth for example.Turbo cars can also benefit from a downshift here and there just dont' need to get to 6000 on them to be into full boost.
I think a lot of prochargers theory of turbo exhuast restriction is baloney and
they say they aren't very streetable yet oem has made and still makes turbo cars including the awesome sl600 mercedes.Porche twin turbo,etc.
Also how can procharger have more area under the curves when the turbo goes full boost at 3000 say ?I have found several turbo dyno graphs but not any supercharger ones on stock ls1 cars ,maybe they have some on the procharger site,didn't look that close.Still I see some great numbers from the ati cars at the track.
I still think going with the sts kit for now and hoping its impressive.I think it will be my talon impresses me a lot and not even running it at near what it could run for boost as need a big front mount intercooler to do that right although did also get a water/alco injection kit that also needs to be installed.
Maybe some of the problems with fast turbo cars is there is so much power at such low rpm that it causes massive control and traction problems.The supers do hit softer and more linear.I would think turbo hit can be compared to spray.Its all in very quick and stays there till redline.But the bottle never goes empty.
01-30-2005, 04:24 PM
#34
LS1Tech Co-Founder
iTrader: (34)
The Vortech head unit used in their LS1 kits is very quiet, but that not always the case with most superchargers.
I find most turbo cars quieter than most supercharged cars assuming the same boltons and mufflers.
I find most turbo cars quieter than most supercharged cars assuming the same boltons and mufflers.
01-30-2005, 04:45 PM
#36
TECH Addict
iTrader: (2)
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Tampa, Fl
Posts: 2,784
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Im going turbo this year. I was at Bradenton Motor Speedway today and there was at least 1 LS1 (Ohio Boys) with a turbo there. It was the sweetest sound Ive ever heard. There was also a Twin Turbo S10 looking truck that went 6.3X or something like that at around 218 mph AND there was a turbo Celica looking car that was one of the 2 fastest out with a 6.2X or 6.3X that was so quite it was scary. I didnt stay for the Finals so Im not sure who REALLY had the fastest time as most let out a little after the clear win.
01-30-2005, 08:32 PM
#40
TECH Addict
iTrader: (2)
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Tampa, Fl
Posts: 2,784
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Pro Stock John
How did our friends the OH Boys do?