Turbo vs. blower debate w/in

[pigglyroot]

as far as by-pass valves...on my truck what it's function is is to bypass boost pressure building to keep from making boost at idle or extremely low RPMS...another factory power robber to keep emissions, reliability and gas milage in check, MANY L owners are actually bypassing that so they have instant boost like most like to think all blowers have anyways...and moral attacks?...get over it, you're not 5, sticks and stones should break your bones, but dont let silly words hurt you :rolleyes:
Summit Rocks!
Blowers or Turbos?

[ June 14, 2003: Message edited by: pigglyroot ]</p>

[Bliggida]

severity is inconsequential. Rules are not meant to be broken. I never said my feelings were hurt and that I was affected by them. I said they shouldn't be allowed, both my moderators and your self control. It is an exercise in responsibility.

As a 5 year old may be affected by name calling. Its usually another 5 year old calling the names!

[Arctc Wolf]

list of compressor's from most to least efficient:

Turbochargers
Centrifugal superchargers
Lysholm superchargers
roots superchargers

data supports this, this cannot be argued, it has already been proven time and time again. This efficiency is w/o adding any intercooler.

adding an intercooler will increase the effectiveness of any forced induction application. An intercooler is harder to be used on a lysholm or roots application due to hood clearance, and the desire of the user to do custom body modfication to fit it, as well as the use of only air-to-water intercoolers.

Superchargers will always make less hp per lb. of boost due to parasitic losses from being crank-driven.

Bliggida, any comments to moderators about ppl's behavior should be done via e-mail to them, not in posts in the forums. I also see u making character attacks. That is hypocritical, and by your interpretation of the rules, I could write a nasty e-mail to the moderators about ur behavior, I won't do this however. I do not need to stoop down to a 5 yr. old's level, like u so plainly put it in your last post. I think u have some growing up to do also, and know what ur talking about b4 u make statements on this board. other members do not need to be misinformed on facts.

[mattsv6]

you jsut stated exactly what i was going to say when i got on here. to put it simply:
<blockquote>quote:</font><hr> Superchargers will always make less hp per lb. of boost due to parasitic losses from being crank-driven.

<hr></blockquote>

all are types of superchargers. all are regularly "AFTERCOOLED" to keep air/fuel desity up to snuff. and turbos have been proven to make more boost and be more efficient then any other type of supercharging method.

[pigglyroot]

"Aftercooler" is just what vortech does to cover up their own ignorance, they publicly stated a while back intercoolers werent nessecary for centrif. s/c setups, and once they actually realized they did help a good bit they decided to call them "aftercoolers"

[Swift_3800_F-Body]

ok, from talking to many people and there experiences with v6's and turbo's and super chargers, most of the people with automatic transmissions prefered a turbocharger with high stall torque converter and a must have Trans Brake.
Many people i have talked to have launched incredibly fast with this combo. TransBrake Launch would be a super hard launch.

On the other hand, people with manual transmissions have prefered Superchargers, instant power. In fact if i owned a manual i would go with a supercharger. but since i have automatic, trans brake launch is what i need and a turbo would go perfect for that.

[Swift_3800_F-Body]

http://www.hotrod.com/techarticles/d...13_0205_trans/

everyone interested in a trans brake go there, in a quick way to say, basically a transbrake is a application where you push a button, mash the peddle at full throttle when you push the button again it throws it into gear safely and your car launches hard and fast. read the article it explains exactly how it works. consider using this to spool up a turbo when at full boost, push the button and fly off the line.

[pigglyroot]

im pretty sure EVERYONE knows what a transbrake is, and they arent nessecary to launch street driven turbo applications ATALL, all you need is a good tranny and some big meaty tires and you can launch at boost with a decent converter

[hawgs]

the amount of wrong information said here is tremendous.

bliggy, you ask for proof that you are wrong? how about you provide proof that you are right? since its a bunch of people's words against yours.

[pigglyroot]

he doesnt need proof, he's the god of cars ;)

[mattsv6]

you can launch with a manual too because the lag causes LESS WHEELSPIN off the line. everyone asks and whines about lag when it is really helpful in a way if you sit and think about it.you only have lag the fist time you get on the gas. the rest of the time the turbo is still spinning, and you jsut need to get it back up to speed a little. if you can shift a manual tranny quickly then you will have no lag problems. jsut have to no how to launch.

[pigglyroot]

alot of people with bigger turbos prefer a small wetshot just to spool

[hou-tex-six]

<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by mattsv6:
you can launch with a manual too because the lag causes LESS WHEELSPIN off the line. everyone asks and whines about lag when it is really helpful in a way if you sit and think about it.you only have lag the fist time you get on the gas. the rest of the time the turbo is still spinning, and you jsut need to get it back up to speed a little. if you can shift a manual tranny quickly then you will have no lag problems. jsut have to no how to launch.<hr></blockquote>

Word. Turbo on a manual with some 3.73's, by the time the car gets situated after the launch boost will be there. Dont let off the gas and powershift, and your money on the shifts too. I dunno what all this nonsense is about turbos being better for one type of tranny and chargers for another, but thats what it is, nonsense.

Transbrakes are hardcore, i seriously doubt you will need one to launch your 300 RWHP monster "racecar". Try using a transbrake on the street and all you will get is smoke.

As for bliggy, your the one who called someones dad a "pussy" in another thread, so I wouldent talk about personal attacks too much and people respecting you, doesent look like you deserve any yourself.

Cp

[Dominic]

Checkout what Jackson Racing thinks about turbos vs supers:


Q: How does the Supercharger compare to a Turbo system and does it need an intercooler? Back to Top
A: Jackson Racing has been in business for over 25 years doing high performance Honda/Acura tuning and we speak with some sort of authority on the subject of Turbo vs Supercharged Vs Intercooling. Having built turbo Hondas since 1976, the first turbo/intercooled CRX's in 1984, and having run the first turbo/intercooled Honda at the first Battle of the Imports in 1990, we do have experience with all of the above issues and can speak, without bias, having done so. And, having seen first hand the long term effects of turbochargers on daily driven high compression Honda/Acura engines, we have opted to supercharge the future.

For ease of installation, instant power, and low cost, nitrous is the only way to fly. However, that is if you only want to go drag racing. If you want everyday nitrous type power, you have to go to forced induction. That is where the turbo Vs supercharger debate comes in. For absolute peak power where driveability, turbo lag, emissions, and long engine life does not need to be taken into consideration, turbo is the only way to go. But, with all things in this life, there is no free ride. With a properly designed turbo charger system you have the ability to produce huge amounts of boost and horsepower easily. The problem with that amount of boost is that once the turbo spools, it goes to full boost. There is no linear delivery of boost.

Consequently, if the turbo spools at 3000 rpm, you have full boost at a valve speed that is very slow. So, the turbo has lots of time to create cylinder pressure on the rods and pistons because of the very long time that the valve is open. This, in turn, is what creates that huge rush of power when the turbo spools. This is also what causes so many turbo engine failures. Combine that with the fact that the compressor sits within 2" of a glowing 1300 degree cast iron oven, the charge air temperature is always very high. This has created the myth that anything with forced induction has to be intercooled. If you have checked the intake temperature of any of the late model O.E. manufactured intercooled turbos, at the intake manifold, not the outlet of the intercooler, you will find that the intake air temperature is near 200 degrees, even after the intercooler. As an example, a test by Sport Compact Car on a new model Turbo/intercooled German built car, they found the charge air temperature at the throttle plate to be 206 degrees after the intercooler. You see, the intercooler is a great thing as long as you have steady air flowing over it. If you are doing a lot of starts and stops, the effectiveness of the intercooler is diminished. Secondarily, once the air has been cooled, it has to be routed back to the intake manifold. That means that it has to come back into the hot engine compartment and the tubing re-heats the air. Not a lot mind you, but it still happens. Equally important, you have to fill all of that tubing with boost, then, when you shift and the bypass blows open, it empties the tubing, requiring the tubing to be refilled. This is the main cause of poor throttle response and the classic turbo lag in a intercooled turbo car. Now, keep in mind that this is all a mute point if you are at speed. But, then you have to stop. Once you stop, you have to cool the turbo. And heat, being the heart of the turbo, is also the enemy of the engine. To further the intercooler debate, let us consider the Ford supercharged/intercooled T-Bird and the GM (Buick-Pontiac) supercharged/non intercooled cars.

The Ford uses a 90 c.i. Eaton supercharger with as much as 14 psi and an intercooler. GM uses a 62 c.i Eaton supercharger with 8 psi and no intercooler. GM mounts their supercharger "Hot Rod" style, on top of the intake manifold as close to the intake valves as possible, with no intercooler. GM's approach, it appears, is to run less boost and thereby, less discharge temperature, and mount the supercharger as close to the intake valve as possible for maximum driveability. Ford's approach seems to be to go for the maximum effect with an intercooler. But, to push the charge air all the way out to the grill, through the intercooler, and back to the intake manifold, requires a larger supercharger and large quantity of boost. Thus, the 90 c.i. supercharger on the T-Bird and the 62 c.i. Supercharger on the GM models. In the final analysis, both engines have an identical horsepower reading. I am sure you are asking yourself "How can that be?" It is in the systems efficiency.

The GM system appears to be more efficient overall. Less load from the supercharger, intercooler, and all of the related plumbing equals better throttle response and an overall better driving package. Now, I am not saying that an air to water intercooler, mounted close to the engine would not be a great piece, it is just that in some engine compartments, it is not possible to package it. So, intercooling is fine if the system is not parasitic by design with plumbing running everywhere, and the net effect of the intercooler system in day to day driving, and that is what I am speaking of, is positive.



http://www.jacksonracing.com/pages/faq.html

[Swift_3800_F-Body]

ok, as i see it, if you are a newbie to cars, go with the supercharger, its easy to maintain, and will give you a good ammount of boost and fun. Without having to know much.

If you are comfortable and knowledgeable with your car, a turbo is a better suited application for your cars.

The myth about supercharger getting boost as low as 1500 and turbo's having the engine to rev to get boost is totally inaccurate as what iv seen on this board, you might get boost from a supercharger as low as 1500 rpms or somewhere low, but consider this, with a supercharger you are not getting full boost at low rpms, you only will see small boost, as you reach higher rpms your boost will increase with rpm.

Say you have a supercharger pushing 10 psi, im guessing that you wont reach peak until you are close to redline. 10 PSI at 6000 rpm, thats pretty crappy if you ask me. Are you going to redline it down the street every day? [img]graemlins/rofl.gif[/img]

6000 rpms all day to get full boost isnt exactly what i would want to do. With a turbo on the other hand, you might not get boost right away at low rpm, but you can create full boost around 2500-3500 rpm with a turbocharger, thats FULL BOOST, with of course the correct turbocharger setup, i recommend calling experts and asking them the correct application for our 3800 v6, you dont want to blow your engine up or leave yourself spooling forever and ever.

i would only recommend a supercharger for two types of people

1.) for people that want a quick boost application because of there lack of knowledge/experience, its an easy application to work with.

2.) drag racing, people that want to push over 30 PSI with a engine rebuild (aka dragsters), these engines are already putting out huge ammounts of horsepower N/A, and are built to rev quite a bit, when you are running around 35 psi with a supercharger and your engine is built to rev like crazy, boost comes quick thus creating alot power fast.

Do not confuse all dragsters methods with street cars racing methods, drag cars have many thousands of dollars put into the engine, they are not even close to our 3800 v6's so dont even dream of our cars or compare our cars to dragsters or you will find yourself wasting alot of money. your best bet to make this car fast is low compression engine with higher psi turbocharged system. i read in an article somewhere a pontiac grand prix GTP ran close to flat 12's with 18 psi from a Paxton supercharger and numerous engine mods.

Another man had a turbocharged pontiac grand prix GT running very low 11's at 18 psi boost using a TE64 turbo and numerous engine mods.

I dont know if anyone of us will run 11's since it seems most of us are on a budget, but with a turbo and a simple engine rebuild, im guessing high 12's very low 13's would be easily made.


Conclusion...

A supercharger is a good application to use but be sure you know what your getting yourself into, you dont make full boost at low rpm with a supercharger. You will make full boost at high rpms with a supercharger

A turbocharger will give you full boost at lower rpms. The turbo lag is way exaggerated, my friend has a WRX, turbo lag is not a problem, he blows away my v6 camaro everytime, even if it wasn't AWD he would still waste me.

Selecting the right turbo is all you have to do. Just call companies and ask them questions.

[ June 15, 2003: Message edited by: Swift_3800_F-Body ]</p>