Turbo

Are you gonna do all the work by yourself?
 
Another factor is, do you want the blowoff valve sound?? Superchargers dont have the need for them..... might sound like a dumb reason, but it was the sole reason one of my friends went turbo over supercharger, no joke
 
Yeah ^^^ what all them said. If you're not trying to go ham, get a supercharger. With more power, you'll need new injectors/fuel pump for fuel delivery, clutch to hold the power, flashpro to tune... lol the tune itself... motor mounts aren't required per se, but more stability = more peace of mind.

With a supercharger, you wont have to get ridiculous 'matching' parts because they don't provide max power, but they still provide higher power and it's more stable for sure.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Nix
Supercharger is what I am doing, and I have around a 300hp goal (give or take a few) which sounds like what you want as well, itll be more reliable and cost you less too. Not to mention the install is much easier too I thinkk
 
Can you justify this statement? I hear it quite often, but nobody ever says why.

I just have been told that from a lot of reputable people whom seem to know a lot about forced induction. I dont know the reasoning behind it though....would love to know exactly "why".....great point squig
 
Right off the bat I can tell you you're able to keep both torque and heat in check. Superchargers are sealed as well, aren't they?
 
Right off the bat I can tell you you're able to keep both torque and heat in check. Superchargers are sealed as well, aren't they?

Yes I believe that they are. Also it seems to me that they are way more OEM friendly, not cut chop etc is really required
 
I think it's just based off the fact that an S/C usually makes less power than a turbo. So it stresses the engine less, hence more reliability

You are talking about different types of stresses in some aspects though. One type of stress isn't necessarily better than the other.
 
You are talking about different types of stresses in some aspects though. One type of stress isn't necessarily better than the other.
Yeah, but I can't imagine parasitic loss stressing your engine more than double the stock torque kicking you in the ***.
 
I think it's more the complexity of the turbo setup as far as reliability goes. They seem to be more finicky and have issues like boost creep and compressor surge to deal with. More parts means more places for issues. Tuning and getting the bypass and waste gates set properly can be arduous. Vent to atmosphere or recirculate?

Not as bad as it used to be but controlling a turbo which operates off of the exhaust gas, controlled by throttle, with some lag, means there is always some variability in the system. The SC route means the throttle controls the belt which turns the blower somewhat instantaneously. I think it's just a more directly controlled system. Letting off the throttle quickly does not stop the turbo from continuing to spin and push boost.

Also from what I've read, and I'm no expert by a long shot, is that SC maintenance can be as easy as checking the belt for wear, tension, and changing the oil of the oiling system if the SC has one. Turbo setups seem to require a lot more piping as well to connect everything and getting ideal placement of the turbo, turbo manifold, and intercooler piping can be tricky in a small engine bay.

Both systems have their + and - though.
 
All this talk of boost really makes me want to buy everything now!
 
  • Like
Reactions: Nix
I like the SC whine better than the turbo "whoosh" noises myself. I dunno, it just does it for me. I think if I was getting one, I would take the SC with more noise over a quiet one even if it was just slightly better.
 
Who would like to explain the difference and benefits/pitfalls of .63 versus .82 A/R?
 
Back
Top