Jump to content
TEAM SHELBY FORUM

Turbocharger Or Supercharger


jason0156

Recommended Posts

I am looking to build up a daily driver/street car, For the occasional saturday night street race. Also it won't take alot of work to take care of. What do you thing is better?

The kit is going on a 2005 mustang gt, 5 speed manual. that I just bought dirt cheap.

 

So i don't have rack up the miles on my shelby I have ordered. :cheerleader:

 

I've been looking at the HP turbo's

 

http://www.turbochargedpower.com/05-06%20Mustang.htm

 

and alll the other superchargers

 

Vortech

Whipple

Kenne Belle

Procharger

Roush

Saleen

 

Any input?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am looking to build up a daily driver/street car, For the occasional saturday night street race. Also it won't take alot of work to take care of. What do you thing is better?

The kit is going on a 2005 mustang gt, 5 speed manual. that I just bought dirt cheap.

 

So i don't have rack up the miles on my shelby I have ordered. :cheerleader:

 

I've been looking at the HP turbo's

 

http://www.turbochargedpower.com/05-06%20Mustang.htm

 

and alll the other superchargers

 

Vortech

Whipple

Kenne Belle

Procharger

Roush

Saleen

 

Any input?

 

Expensive,but I'd take twin turbos!!!
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am looking to build up a daily driver/street car, For the occasional saturday night street race. Also it won't take alot of work to take care of. What do you thing is better?

The kit is going on a 2005 mustang gt, 5 speed manual. that I just bought dirt cheap.

 

So i don't have rack up the miles on my shelby I have ordered. :cheerleader:

 

I've been looking at the HP turbo's

 

http://www.turbochargedpower.com/05-06%20Mustang.htm

 

and alll the other superchargers

 

Vortech

Whipple

Kenne Belle

Procharger

Roush

Saleen

 

Any input?

 

 

 

 

SUPERCHARGER_______

 

Alot easier to put on---and less expensive!!!!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

a lot of cobra guys have had trouble with HP not getting them kits in a timely fashion. When they do get them, months later, many have reported poor fitment and other quality issues.

 

I would look into http://hellionpowersystems.com/kit_05.php

 

or

 

http://www.turbohorsepower.com/kits.html

 

The hellion kit is on the shelf and usually is shipped the next day.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks for the info dgissin1.

How is the reliability of a turbo setup and maintance of one?

 

 

This is a question I have been researching myself. I have owned two cars with turbos and generally have been very pleased. I have never owned a vehicle with a S/C, but I have ridden in several. Here is my take, although I am sure there are people who are far more educated on the subject.

 

For starters:

-Turbos are more efficient if sized properly(We'll assume they are in this case).

-Spool up faster, i.e. instant power.

-Generally offer less wear on the engine's driveshaft and other internals.

-Alot easier to increase/decrease boost when compared to a S/C. Turn of a knob vs. changing pullies and belts.

-Not a lot of maintenance, i.e. changing oil etc.

 

-They do however put out more heat in the engine compartment.

-Generally more expensive than a S/C.

-Probably not emissions legal in most cases.

-Not as mainstream as say a vortech, paxton, or procharger. So parts support could be an issue.

-Generally harder and more complicated to install.

 

Me personally, I think I'll wait for a few more systems to surface and eventually go with a turbo system. Read the reviews, take a ride in a turbo car and a s/c and make your own assessment. Most races I have witnessed with h.p being fairly equal, the turbo cars have pulled a lot harder on the top end and left the s/c cars.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am not an expert but I saw a recent episode on some horsepower type show where they discussed this. Basically they said that since superchargers are driven by belts they rob your engine of HP and torque. They led me to believe that turbos can produce alot more HP and torque gains and are generally much more convenient and efficient. It was a cool show though.

 

And... I did stay at a Holiday Inn last night :doh:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I talked to the guy at this site today great kit, great guy.

http://www.turbochargedpower.com/05-06%20Mustang.htm

A little expensive, but quality is good.

I will try to go with this kit.

 

 

 

I talked to the guy at this site today great kit, great guy.

http://www.turbochargedpower.com/05-06%20Mustang.htm

A little expensive, but quality is good.

I will try to go with this kit. :shift:

just have to save more $$$

 

post-5511-1156189286_thumb.jpg

post-5511-1156189286_thumb.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is a question I have been researching myself. I have owned two cars with turbos and generally have been very pleased. I have never owned a vehicle with a S/C, but I have ridden in several. Here is my take, although I am sure there are people who are far more educated on the subject.

 

For starters:

-Turbos are more efficient if sized properly(We'll assume they are in this case).

-Spool up faster, i.e. instant power.

-Generally offer less wear on the engine's driveshaft and other internals.

-Alot easier to increase/decrease boost when compared to a S/C. Turn of a knob vs. changing pullies and belts.

-Not a lot of maintenance, i.e. changing oil etc.

 

-They do however put out more heat in the engine compartment.

-Generally more expensive than a S/C.

-Probably not emissions legal in most cases.

-Not as mainstream as say a vortech, paxton, or procharger. So parts support could be an issue.

-Generally harder and more complicated to install.

 

Me personally, I think I'll wait for a few more systems to surface and eventually go with a turbo system. Read the reviews, take a ride in a turbo car and a s/c and make your own assessment. Most races I have witnessed with h.p being fairly equal, the turbo cars have pulled a lot harder on the top end and left the s/c cars.

 

 

i thought turbos suffered from "lag" due to the feedback nature (exhaust must be at higher velocity for it to kick in) and therefore diid not deliver power as instantanously as the S/C. is that wrong?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Correct.

 

That's one of the advantages of s/c'ing. Boost is There!

 

I'm more than a little concerned that the turbo may spool up during a turn and cause me to soil myself. :fan:

 

 

I think as a general rule that a turbo charger will make more RWHP than a supercharger given the same car and boost levels. Not as much parasitic loss. Generally speaking, the fastest cars I've personally seen at the track are turbocharged. The roots and twin screws just aren't as efficient on the top end. If you want a pure tire roaster, then go with a twin screw. Instant torque but it'll die out on the top end. A turbo will be much better (generally speaking) on the top end.

 

www.powerhouse411.com

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think as a general rule that a turbo charger will make more RWHP than a supercharger given the same car and boost levels. Not as much parasitic loss. Generally speaking, the fastest cars I've personally seen at the track are turbocharged. The roots and twin screws just aren't as efficient on the top end. If you want a pure tire roaster, then go with a twin screw. Instant torque but it'll die out on the top end. A turbo will be much better (generally speaking) on the top end.

 

www.powerhouse411.com

 

I agree with your first sentence. I'll admit I've not owned a "new" turbo car (last I've owned was a mid '90s). However, when I did drive both years ago, the supercharged cars tended to have much improved throttle response compared to turbos. The way I see it, the turbo is more efficient, improved fuel economy, etc....but the throttle response and lack of turbo lag makes me prefer the supercharger. I believe they have improved turbo lag by going to lighter and lighter impeller wheels, but I'd have to believe there still is a difference.

 

As an aside, I work for a company that makes turbochargers. I used to be a technician in the "destructive turbo lab". We got to run turbos on a test stand at higher and higher speeds until they "exploded". The walls of the room were 14" thick concrete for safety purposes...they really can make a mess. :fan:

 

I had a supercharger in my 1989 Toyota MR2, but it was different. It had an electromechanically operated clutch...sort of like the compressor on a typical car air conditioner. I had the car for 13 years and it performed flawlessly all the time...wonderful vehicle. The car had little torque, but it was extremely lightweight, so 155 HP and 150 lb*ft of torque got that car to 60 MPH in just 5.8 seconds.....and I got 26 MPG in the city.

 

Dave

Link to comment
Share on other sites

i thought turbos suffered from "lag" due to the feedback nature (exhaust must be at higher velocity for it to kick in) and therefore diid not deliver power as instantanously as the S/C. is that wrong?

 

 

Read this: http://www.turbochargedpower.com/Turbo%20vs%20Blowers.htm

 

It does a good job of explaining the differences. Although they do want to sell you a turbo, everything is pretty much inline with my experience and what I've read in other publications.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Read this: http://www.turbochargedpower.com/Turbo%20vs%20Blowers.htm

 

It does a good job of explaining the differences. Although they do want to sell you a turbo, everything is pretty much inline with my experience and what I've read in other publications.

 

Thanks for posting, but wow....that article is absolutely FULL of misleading information. VERY biased. Few of them are outright lies, but misleading for sure. I'll give some examples, but there are more.

 

1) "Turbochargers need no step-up mechanism and have only one moving part, the compressor/turbine wheel assembly". While this is true, note the word ASSEMBLY. You could just about as easily say this for a supercharger...there is only one moving part...the supercharger assembly. :hysterical: The compressor/turbine wheel assembly has numerous sub-components, such that there are really about a dozen moving parts.

 

2) While they talk about all the inherent problems in supercharger reliability, they make no mention at all of the "coking" problem associated with turbochargers. You see, most turbos are oil cooled. Turbos get so incredibly hot that if you run them with boost, park the car, and let it sit, the oil sitting in the turbo actually "cokes", turning to sludge, and causing a myriad of problems. It's a matter of debate which system's issues are worse...but they don't even mention the turbo coking issue.

 

3) "This "parasitic" drag is always present, even when the car is being driven normally, and can rob 20%-30% of the power being produced by the engine." Wow....how misleading can you get. While their statement is true, it gives the impression that the 20-30% loss is at ALL times, since earlier in the sentence they say the drag is "always" present. The 20-30% loss numbers they are quoting are only at maximum boost levels at very high RPM, so the large losses they quote are only realized when you really crank 'her up.

 

4) "Turbochargers, however, are exhaust gas driven and don't require any horsepower to spin the compressor." This is simply wrong. If you don't think the increased backpressure caused by a turbocharger doesn't use horsepower, I have a GT500 that was built in 2005 that I'll sell you.

 

5) "Superchargers are generally not upgradeable. When higher performance is required beyond the capabilities of a specific supercharger system, the entire system must be replaced." What? How about adding an intercooler or a pulley? Geesh.

 

Too many to list them all...proceed with caution. This was obviously written by a marketing/advertising person. :fan::fan:

 

Dave

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...
...