Turbo or Supercharger?

jeepermc · Jul 28, 2008

Boonie Buster said:
Oh, and it's a golf....

You mean a Rabbit? :fawkdancesmiley:

Jim1 · Jul 28, 2008

Boonie Buster said:
It's funny you think the rods/head gasket are just going to disinegrate on startup:haha: I have seen more blow up on less:haha: :haha: :haha:

Talking with people tonight about this subject...

I think part of the point i am trying to make, playing devil's advocate with this, is that the the SC CAN make the same torque with LESS horsepower, QUICKER than a turbo can. Doesn't mean it can make MORE, just saying that it CAN make it with LESS hp. And yes rally/road/mall/drag driving situations can all have different advantages to either... not saying BOTH are good for ALL, just saying some will stand out in performance over another.

(and the whole, "...because the SC is closer to the A/C pump it runs cooler" thing..... I can't believe some of you fell for that.:fawkdancesmiley: :haha: :haha: :haha: :haha: )

I don't recall saying I "think" anything about parts disintegrating on startup. But it's good to see you find the idea funny because a sense of humor will be helpful when you find out what I actually meant.
Good luck, I'll move on now.

Binder · Jul 28, 2008

Boonie Buster said:
I think part of the point i am trying to make, playing devil's advocate with this, is that the the SC CAN make the same torque with LESS horsepower, QUICKER than a turbo can. Doesn't mean it can make MORE, just saying that it CAN make it with LESS hp.

What would be the point of this? Someone is installing forced induction on a engine in efforts to make less power?

Lucky Jeff · Jul 28, 2008

"I'm going to detune my turbo car so it will be more comparable to a supercharged car" :haha:

Boonie Buster · Jul 29, 2008

Binder said:
What would be the point of this? Someone is installing forced induction on a engine in efforts to make less power?

It takes less effort for a supercharger to do the same thing a turbo would with more HP... I don't think I typed that last rambling out correctly...

Boonie Buster · Jul 29, 2008

Jim said:
I don't recall saying I "think" anything about parts disintegrating on startup. But it's good to see you find the idea funny because a sense of humor will be helpful when you find out what I actually meant.
Good luck, I'll move on now.

You must have first hand experience with the 2.0L blowing up? I have never built a motor before:drooling1: . So I guess there is no time like the present to find out, right?:awesomework: You'd be suprised at just how many knuckle heads have built this motor with turbo, chargers, NOS, vacuum cleaners and rod the crap out of them and have no problems... It's not like my 2.slow that I just took out had 280,000 miles on it and maybe 3 oil changes since I owned it (at 250,000 miles, I wanted that thing to blow, unfortunately it never did...:looser: )

but hey, they all blow up eventually right? I mean nascar motors last forever.

Lucky Jeff · Jul 29, 2008

Boonie Buster said:
It takes less effort for a supercharger to do the same thing a turbo would with more HP... I don't think I typed that last rambling out correctly...

ummmm. You do know that superchargers are driven off the motor and turbos off exhaust right? :eeek: . If you ask me, effort is the motor working to turn the supercharger.

Boonie Buster · Jul 29, 2008

Lucky Jeff said:
ummmm. You do know that superchargers are driven off the motor and turbos off exhaust right? :eeek: . If you ask me, effort is the motor working to turn the supercharger.

sorry, I was just talking in pure/total HP. Using that false chart I had posted earlier.:redneck:

TipsyMcStagger · Aug 7, 2008

i like both. turbo for all out power.

i go turbo because its extremely cheap for me to build a kit for basically any car or truck. s/c are expensive.

TipsyMcStagger · Aug 7, 2008

ps this thread sucks and some people don't have a clue.

non-centrifugal s/c blows hotter air then a turbo running in its efficiency range because s/c are mostly very inefficient.

the new eaton 4 screw on the corvette zr1 is the most efficient s/c ever made and its still not close to a turbo.

smaller compressor spinning faster = more efficient than a large compressor spinning slower

unfortunately in this world we obey the laws of thermodynamics!!!!!!!

pps:

the thing about turbos and wheelers is that they do need to spool fully before they start making real power, by the time this happens your tires are already spinning wildly.

this is why displacement and/or non-centrifugal s/c are good for wheelers. low rpm "grunt" type of power.

for all out horsepower turbos rule the world end of story. and yes i know that top fuel uses s/c, but this is due to safety more then power. they tried it before and the backfires or other common engine blow ups, scatter turbo parts everywhere... into the crowd... etc...

TipsyMcStagger · Aug 7, 2008

2slow4you said:
Well it wasn't any normal Civic. Built by English Racing Motorsports, it was fitted with a 4G63T, Eclipse GS trans, Garrett T3/T4, FMIC, MAF translator, blah blah blah. Long story short, its a civic with a eclipse/Evo drivetrain (minus the AWD of course) My vehicle preference has been changed. Im now leaning towards getting a MR2 Turbo. I've had nothing but problems with every honda i've owned. So, staying with Toyota is what i plan on doing.

i know you, and whats his face that loves the jeeps and worked at the jeep fab place. forgot his name

anyways i was at PIR when the oil filter fell off your civic

Lucky Jeff · Aug 7, 2008

PIR or PR?

Bunk1 · Aug 7, 2008

So what are you going to do boonie....and how soon?

Nuzzy · Aug 7, 2008

TipsyMcStagger said:
ps this thread sucks and some people don't have a clue.

I like you. Welcome! :haha::haha::haha:

Bunk1 · Aug 7, 2008

Nuzzy said:
I like you. Welcome! :haha::haha::haha:

So do i. Dood has a grocery list of fast cars. And bikes.

Boonie Buster · Aug 7, 2008

Bunk said:
So what are you going to do boonie....and how soon?

Neither...and never....:haha: I have a hard enough time staying out of trouble with the car as it is, let alone giving it double the horsepower:haha: :haha: :haha:

But if i were to do it, it would more than likely be the turbo, I have always been more of a fan of them, the supercharger is just too much draw on the motor, (ie. too much gas wasted...) If I ever get a bug under my butt or come across a good deal on one, for sure, i'll do it, but it's not on my top priority list right now... Got other things to worry about, like getting the trucky back on the road:cheer:

Bunk1 · Aug 8, 2008

Boonie Buster said:
Neither...and never....:haha: I have a hard enough time staying out of trouble with the car as it is, let alone giving it double the horsepower:haha: :haha: :haha:

But if i were to do it, it would more than likely be the turbo, I have always been more of a fan of them, the supercharger is just too much draw on the motor, (ie. too much gas wasted...) If I ever get a bug under my butt or come across a good deal on one, for sure, i'll do it, but it's not on my top priority list right now... Got other things to worry about, like getting the trucky back on the road:cheer:

So your just a tease then...Maybee i should start a thread about putting nitrous on my legend.

Boonie Buster · Aug 8, 2008

Bunk said:
So your just a tease then...Maybee i should start a thread about putting nitrous on my legend.

Yes, big tease:kissmyass: :kiss: There was a turbo kit that just came up for sale a bit ago, and i passed on it, it would have taken as much money to get it where i would want/need it to be vs. buying a kit...:booo:

Plus I just dumped all the money and then some into a CD so ya.....can't touch dat.....de..de de de....can't touch dat!:redneck: