Stefan?????

[Mighty Thor]

Originally posted by Shane:
a turbo looks better! [img]tongue.gif[/img]

I disagree, SC looks better and cleaner. [img]graemlins/rock.gif[/img]

[darkthoughts5000]

quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by Shane:
a turbo looks better!
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I disagree, SC looks better and cleaner.

i disagree. i think the turbo charger looks better. it just looks like you can bolt on a supercharger... but with a turbo, it looks like actual time and effort went into a custom system. cleaner, yes, the supercharger looks cleaner. i think something under the hood looks best though when its obvious that someone definately has "custom" on all their parts.

[jc Kyle]

hawgs smells

[BadAzzRS]

he could get 60 horsepower for under $1000

NAWWWWWSSSSS and lots of it lol

[BadAzzRS]

a turbo looks better!

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I disagree, SC looks better and cleaner.

I disagree i think the electric supercharger looks alot better, and clean, and gives more power.

[Shirl]

Ok, yet another post becoming useless. NO turbos DO NOT LOOK BETTER than superchargers. They both LOOK pretty much the SAME. And depending on the setup, either can look better than the other. So let's not generalize here folks.

[Turbo V6 Camaro]

umm 63 HP for, a cam will do that, look at the cam page, i'm talking crank HP; NOT RWHP

[Rob 94Hawk 319]

Man.. If you're strapping on a blower or a turbo for looks... There's some plain wrong there.

________________
Rob
1994 Firehawk#319
11.83@120.61
Slightly Modified
1996 Blown V6
2002 Trailblazer
San Diego F-Bodies
"Garp bit Bonky."