Forced Induction Superchargers | Turbochargers | Intercoolers

Supercharger or Turbo?

Old Oct 4, 2014 | 12:34 PM
  #1  
LQ4 Tank's Avatar
Thread Starter
Staging Lane
 
Joined: Sep 2014
Posts: 86
Likes: 0
From: College Station, Tx.
Default Supercharger or Turbo?

My original plan was to run a Procharger on my 3/4 ton Sierra (yes I'm going the forged route and sticking to low compression, that's out of the way) but have seen a lot of people running the twin screw style superchargers, and guys running turbos, which I'm in love with just don't think will prevail with a 7,000 pound truck. Which setup will provide the low end power? I know the problem with turbos is that you have to build boost and that they come on strong in the top end, so will a Procharger work better for my low end needs?
Reply
Old Oct 4, 2014 | 01:11 PM
  #2  
ken6881's Avatar
On The Tree
 
Joined: Apr 2013
Posts: 119
Likes: 0
Default

For off idle performance a twin screw is your best bet. Whatthe truck being used for, max power goals?
Reply
Old Oct 4, 2014 | 01:15 PM
  #3  
JoeNova's Avatar
Restricted User
 
Joined: Mar 2014
Posts: 7,192
Likes: 109
From: Ohio
Default

Prochargers build boost linear to RPM. The faster the engine is spinning, the faster the procharger is turning by a direct ratio. This means that it starts low and builds boost slowly and predictably. This isn't the best for low end torque.

Twin screws and turbos both provide better low-mid range. The twin screw will provide the best low end.
Reply
Old Oct 4, 2014 | 02:33 PM
  #4  
LQ4 Tank's Avatar
Thread Starter
Staging Lane
 
Joined: Sep 2014
Posts: 86
Likes: 0
From: College Station, Tx.
Default

Originally Posted by ken6881
For off idle performance a twin screw is your best bet. Whatthe truck being used for, max power goals?
Kenne Bell practically the best? I'll start researching them. I wanna build the truck as a sleeper I guess you could say. Tired of all the pretty boys in their diesels, need to be put in their place. I wanna end up making 600 and 600, I feel like those are practical numbers and streetable.. Could be wrong however.
Reply
Old Oct 4, 2014 | 03:04 PM
  #5  
ken6881's Avatar
On The Tree
 
Joined: Apr 2013
Posts: 119
Likes: 0
Default

Originally Posted by LQ4 Tank
Kenne Bell practically the best? I'll start researching them. I wanna build the truck as a sleeper I guess you could say. Tired of all the pretty boys in their diesels, need to be put in their place. I wanna end up making 600 and 600, I feel like those are practical numbers and streetable.. Could be wrong however.
Those are very realistic numbers. Keene bell, Whipple, even a eforce will get u close if not there. Just depends on what your willing to put up with, ease of instillation, and cost what will best fit your goals.
Reply
Old Oct 4, 2014 | 03:25 PM
  #6  
LQ4 Tank's Avatar
Thread Starter
Staging Lane
 
Joined: Sep 2014
Posts: 86
Likes: 0
From: College Station, Tx.
Default

Originally Posted by ken6881
Those are very realistic numbers. Keene bell, Whipple, even a eforce will get u close if not there. Just depends on what your willing to put up with, ease of instillation, and cost what will best fit your goals.
Yeah this whole build will be spread out of the course of a couple years, haha, just trying to get a parts list going and see what kind of cost I'll be looking at. I'm getting an LS9 cam cheap off of my tuner and it'll work for what I'm going to do, just need to figure out what to do with heads and bottom end parts.
Reply
Old Oct 4, 2014 | 03:47 PM
  #7  
trevmust's Avatar
TECH Enthusiast
 
Joined: Aug 2012
Posts: 536
Likes: 0
From: Vancouver, BC
Default

lingenfelter is selling their ls9 cam for 389. if you got the budget just twincharge. solves both problems :-p
Reply
Old Oct 4, 2014 | 04:03 PM
  #8  
LQ4 Tank's Avatar
Thread Starter
Staging Lane
 
Joined: Sep 2014
Posts: 86
Likes: 0
From: College Station, Tx.
Default

Originally Posted by trevmust
lingenfelter is selling their ls9 cam for 389. if you got the budget just twincharge. solves both problems :-p
I mean a cam that came OUT of an LS9, not a nicy shiny one to go IN!
Reply
Old Oct 4, 2014 | 05:07 PM
  #9  
stevieturbo's Avatar
9 Second Club
 
Joined: Nov 2003
Posts: 13,616
Likes: 185
From: Norn Iron
Default

A twin screw would probably be best. But at that weight and moderate power goals, you could build a 427 with small turbos that would give you very good spool which would offer lots of torque at lower rpm's
Reply
Old Oct 4, 2014 | 05:32 PM
  #10  
JoeNova's Avatar
Restricted User
 
Joined: Mar 2014
Posts: 7,192
Likes: 109
From: Ohio
Default

Originally Posted by stevieturbo
A twin screw would probably be best. But at that weight and moderate power goals, you could build a 427 with small turbos that would give you very good spool which would offer lots of torque at lower rpm's
Twin turbo 427 for 600 HP?
Reply
Old Oct 4, 2014 | 05:34 PM
  #11  
stevieturbo's Avatar
9 Second Club
 
Joined: Nov 2003
Posts: 13,616
Likes: 185
From: Norn Iron
Default

Originally Posted by JoeNova
Twin turbo 427 for 600 HP?
You're ignoring the low rpm, small turbo torque aspect which would be rather handy with a 7000lb vehicle

The headline power number is almost meaningless.
Reply
Old Oct 4, 2014 | 06:37 PM
  #12  
LQ4 Tank's Avatar
Thread Starter
Staging Lane
 
Joined: Sep 2014
Posts: 86
Likes: 0
From: College Station, Tx.
Default

Originally Posted by stevieturbo
A twin screw would probably be best. But at that weight and moderate power goals, you could build a 427 with small turbos that would give you very good spool which would offer lots of torque at lower rpm's
Now that just sounds expensive.. Wanna stick with my iron block 6.0, MAY bore it out but does it really make a difference?
Reply
Old Oct 4, 2014 | 06:44 PM
  #13  
stevieturbo's Avatar
9 Second Club
 
Joined: Nov 2003
Posts: 13,616
Likes: 185
From: Norn Iron
Default

Originally Posted by LQ4 Tank
Now that just sounds expensive.. Wanna stick with my iron block 6.0, MAY bore it out but does it really make a difference?
I was only suggesting the larger motor again because of torque reasons.

You could create more low rpm torque more easily, and spool any turbos faster. it would just do it all more easily.

But of course you could retain the 6.0

Ive never driven such a heavy vehicle, so I'd think every little helps. But I'd also think the weight and auto trans would load then motor up well which should also help spool any turbos used.
Again with the low overall power goals in mind, you should have access to very fast spool from a turbo setup via small turbos.

Or a twin screw blower, whichever you think might work best.
Reply
Old Oct 5, 2014 | 04:24 PM
  #14  
RonA's Avatar
Launching!
iTrader: (1)
 
Joined: Oct 2013
Posts: 285
Likes: 0
From: Browns Valley, CA
Default

Originally Posted by LQ4 Tank
Kenne Bell practically the best? I'll start researching them. I wanna build the truck as a sleeper I guess you could say. Tired of all the pretty boys in their diesels, need to be put in their place. I wanna end up making 600 and 600, I feel like those are practical numbers and streetable.. Could be wrong however.
You better bring a bigger hammer. Especially around College Station. If you are at 7000#'s a 600hp truck is not going to be anything special.
Reply
Old Oct 5, 2014 | 06:25 PM
  #15  
LQ4 Tank's Avatar
Thread Starter
Staging Lane
 
Joined: Sep 2014
Posts: 86
Likes: 0
From: College Station, Tx.
Default

Originally Posted by RonA
You better bring a bigger hammer. Especially around College Station. If you are at 7000#'s a 600hp truck is not going to be anything special.
Well there's always room for more boost
Reply
Old Oct 6, 2014 | 06:50 PM
  #16  
sweet99ss's Avatar
10 Second Club
iTrader: (41)
 
Joined: Apr 2010
Posts: 1,907
Likes: 6
From: Plains Ks
Default

Turbo will make the biggest power by far.
Reply
Old Oct 6, 2014 | 08:05 PM
  #17  
LQ4 Tank's Avatar
Thread Starter
Staging Lane
 
Joined: Sep 2014
Posts: 86
Likes: 0
From: College Station, Tx.
Default

Originally Posted by sweet99ss
Turbo will make the biggest power by far.
I know it'll make the most power, just not enough down low. Not enough to get a 7,000 pound aerodynamically challenged truck moving quick.
Reply
Old Oct 6, 2014 | 08:15 PM
  #18  
sweet99ss's Avatar
10 Second Club
iTrader: (41)
 
Joined: Apr 2010
Posts: 1,907
Likes: 6
From: Plains Ks
Default

Originally Posted by LQ4 Tank
I know it'll make the most power, just not enough down low. Not enough to get a 7,000 pound aerodynamically challenged truck moving quick.
Choosing the correct size turbo you will have faaaaar more torque than a procharger and be able to make a few hundred more horsepower than a roots style blower.
Reply
Old Oct 6, 2014 | 08:27 PM
  #19  
bigd98's Avatar
Staging Lane
iTrader: (11)
 
Joined: Apr 2008
Posts: 91
Likes: 0
Default I agree!

Originally Posted by sweet99ss
Choosing the correct size turbo you will have faaaaar more torque than a procharger and be able to make a few hundred more horsepower than a roots style blower.
^^^ I agree! U could even convert to e85 and get that much more TQ and HP!
Reply
Old Oct 7, 2014 | 12:26 AM
  #20  
LQ4 Tank's Avatar
Thread Starter
Staging Lane
 
Joined: Sep 2014
Posts: 86
Likes: 0
From: College Station, Tx.
Default

Originally Posted by sweet99ss
Choosing the correct size turbo you will have faaaaar more torque than a procharger and be able to make a few hundred more horsepower than a roots style blower.
I'm interested now.. And the E85 swap just sounds difficult.
Reply

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 08:16 PM.