Notices
The Loft / EvoM Car Talk Corner The landing pad for automotive discussions, news, articles, and opinions. A place for the community to kick back and chat.

what would be better Turbo or Supercharger

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old Aug 21, 2003, 06:45 PM
  #1  
Newbie
Thread Starter
 
00Eclipse_GS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Sharon, PA
Posts: 33
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
what would be better Turbo or Supercharger

I was just wondering which would be better for my eclipse A 14b Turbocharger or the ripp mods Supercharger kit..i am having a hard time deciding and i was hoping that u guys could help me out with a decision...
Old Aug 21, 2003, 06:51 PM
  #2  
Evolving Member
iTrader: (2)
 
Keyser Soze's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Raleigh, NC
Posts: 400
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Well i know a buddy of mine had a supercharger in his s2000 and did not like the effects so he decided to drop a turbo in.. From what he told me the turbo is way better. i dont know how much difference it makes from a mitsu engine compared to a honda engine in reguards to supercharger vs. turbo..

I hope that makes some sence it may be a bit wordy

ps i like turbos better myself, i think they are more fun...
Old Aug 21, 2003, 07:08 PM
  #3  
Newbie
Thread Starter
 
00Eclipse_GS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Sharon, PA
Posts: 33
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
my friend said i shouldnt go with the supercharger b/c i could get more bosst with a turbo but for my budget the supercharger would be more practical b/c it is made for the inline 4 engine that i have..and he also says with a turbo i could get more bang for the buck..i dont know i need more opinions on both
Old Aug 21, 2003, 07:16 PM
  #4  
Evolving Member
iTrader: (2)
 
Keyser Soze's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Raleigh, NC
Posts: 400
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
hmmm... well i think i remember hearing from someone else that a turbo does give more bang for the buck but i honestly just dont know a lot on this topic.. wish i could be of more help
Old Aug 21, 2003, 07:49 PM
  #5  
Evolving Member
iTrader: (1)
 
The Emperor's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: So Cal
Posts: 322
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
i think a supercharger puts more stress on the engine than a turbo.
Old Aug 21, 2003, 07:51 PM
  #6  
In Timeout
iTrader: (1)
 
TeamSlamDotCom's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: TEAMSLAM.COM
Posts: 105
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
SC = less maintenance and support

TC = killa sounds like BOV and general spoolery
Old Aug 21, 2003, 08:18 PM
  #7  
Newbie
 
zlthomps's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 8
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Go w/ a 14b custom setup. You can do it with 1G and 2G turbo DSM parts for cheap. Turbo 4G64 are consistantly running better times than supercharged 3Gs.

Look at the kind of dumbers API put down with their turboed 3G GS. 265whp at 8psi on a T3/T4. That is impressive. And it was also enought to put them in in the high 13s.

the 14b TD05H would be a fine choice for the 4G64. However, I think a small 16g would be better depending on where exactly you want your power band.

As far as "killa BOV sounds" I am afraid that is not possible unless you use a standalone or an emanage. On NA MAF cars that air is metered in and if you purge it the ECU thinks it has more air than it actually has. That will lead to bogs and stalls between gears and at idle.
Old Aug 21, 2003, 10:03 PM
  #8  
Newbie
 
ljasonl's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: arkansas
Posts: 12
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
A SC can make just as much boost as a turbo, the main difference lies in power delivery. A SC is RPM dependent, meaning it is driven off a pulley connected to your engines crank, and will build more boost the higer you rev your engine. A turbo is throttle position dependant, meaning it is driven by exhaust gas and will build more boost the harder you press the gas, regardless of the RPM. As you can see, this means both have inherent strengths and weaknesses. A turbo should give you better gas mileage and less engine wear than a SC making the same amount of power, because it only builds boost and uses gas when you floor it, while a SC does it every time you get to higher RPM. A turbo however will have what is called "boost lag", this is when you floor it you have to wait a few seconds for it to build boost. A SC, on the other hand, will have instant response as long as you planned ahead and had it in a low gear, giving you the ability to get an early jump against turbo cars. A SC will be much easier to tune than a turbo, and if the turbo isn't tuned properly, the gas mileage advantage goes out the window.

Also realize the amount of boost isn't everything. A small turbo like a 14B running at 15 psi might actually make less power than a larger turbo (or supercharger) running at only 7 or 8 psi. My friend was running the stock T25 on his Talon at about 18 psi, then swapped on a T04 60-1 and cranked it down to 8 psi. That's less than half the boost he was running before, but he gained about 60 or 70 hp to the wheels (*** dyno ) So just because a turbo or supercharger kit says it only runs 6 psi or something like that, don't think that means it's gonna make less power than slapping on a 14B and running it at higher levels like your friend wants to do. It depends on the size of the compressor, AR, etc...

A SC makes cool spooling sounds too, and has a BOV too...

Neither is necessarily better than the other, just which is better for each specific application. It all depends on what you want from your car. Do you drive it every day? Can you afford to have it tuned right? What kind of racing do you want to do? How important is throttle response? There are way too many factors to go through.
Old Aug 21, 2003, 10:23 PM
  #9  
Newbie
Thread Starter
 
00Eclipse_GS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Sharon, PA
Posts: 33
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
thanx ljasonl what u said helped me alot with my tc and sc problem.
Old Aug 22, 2003, 10:21 PM
  #10  
Newbie
 
zlthomps's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 8
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
You also have to take into account that the 4G64 has a fairly high displacment and low redline for your typical 4 banger. So you will want to pick a turbo that spools quickly for street applications. Go look at some compressor maps for a 14b TDO5H and see cross reference CFM and boost PSI, etc...

Check out www.neweclipse.org if you have not already... But I happen to drive a 2002 GS and Ive done my share of studying. Although what ljasonl said was very correct, it is irrelevant. If you want to make power on this motor, get a turbo. Point blank.
Old Aug 28, 2003, 07:11 PM
  #11  
Account Disabled
iTrader: (1)
 
umiami80's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: NJ
Posts: 2,026
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
All things being equal, Turbos make more power period. SC's are parasitic, and take power to run power. They do offer low end torque (TWIN SCREW) but their top ends lag. They also make what ever boost it is set at and then if you are at a high altitude, boost will drop.

Turbos take wasted energy and turn it into power always making more at the same boost levels. They also have a WASTEGATE so it'll allways make what ever boost you set it at.
Old Aug 31, 2003, 11:27 AM
  #12  
Evolved Member
iTrader: (10)
 
Corey's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Jeffersonville, IN / Louisville KY
Posts: 2,757
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Going from a 03' Cobra which was SC'ed to my Evo I've noticed a big difference in power delivery. It has taken a bit getting used to.

I could drive my Cobra without making boost no matter how high I revved it. I noticed on it that the boost would come on only when I would press the gas so far. Same as the Evo.

A supercharger has it's advantages. As soon as you floor it...you have instant boost where as a turbo your gonna have some lag everytime.

I ran my buddy in his BPU Supra and got him by almost two cars everytime we raced just because I had instant boost and he had lag. My car was stock when we ran. My car dynoed 390 and his dynoed 395.

We ran from a 60 mph roll to 125 and he never caught me.
Old Aug 31, 2003, 06:34 PM
  #13  
Evolving Member
 
TypeIII's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: 852 604 765 408
Posts: 244
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
The single most important factor when deciding on an aftermarket forced induction kit is the amount of research and development that's been put into the kit. What good is 400whp going to do you if your car is constantly in the shop? You want something that's been tested, something tried and true... You want to know that when you have the kit installed, you can take your car on a road trip without freaking out about a bearing seizing on you, or an oil line rupturing.

If there are a few kits out there that are equally reliable, pick one that offers you the power delivery you like, with the least cost.

Really, the choice should be simple.
Related Topics
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
mobilman
The Loft / EvoM Car Talk Corner
51
Aug 26, 2019 10:28 AM
bigstott
Lancer Aftermarket Forced Induction Tech
92
Mar 8, 2016 06:54 AM
Infamous_pt4
Lancer Aftermarket Forced Induction Tech
34
Oct 22, 2009 05:05 PM
heartagram88
04-06 Ralliart General
12
Dec 23, 2007 10:15 AM
sentry65
The Loft / EvoM Car Talk Corner
37
May 18, 2007 11:22 AM



Quick Reply: what would be better Turbo or Supercharger



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 07:37 PM.