Which Is Better Super-charged ? Or Turbo-charged ?

[Hamgachan]

Guys,

Can anyone elaborate based on your experience or knowledge,

which is better ? Super-charge ? or Turbo charge ?

IN TERMS OF MAINTAINABILITY...

what are the difference for both ? IN TERMS OF RESPONSE
and POWER FEED..

I'm not trying to start a topic that later will cause fight between
ppl of turbo's and SC's.. just trying to gather as
much knowledge as possible, ok ?

:ph34r:

 

[Cross]

No need to fight just get nissan march superturbo. Both Supercharged and Turbocharged :lol: :lol:

Anyway just my 2 cents. Supercharged is better response and no lag but low higher end output. Turbo just the opposite.

 

[jonathan79]

Erm...I thk SC fuel consumption will be higher then turbo..
Is it right?
:D

 

[soulfly]

i would choose turbo
- easier to upgrade coz easy to modify, compare to supercharger, everything must come from the same kit
- supercharger has limited upgrade parts, usually supercharger pulley is changed to allow different level of boost
- turbo easier to upgrade, and yields more power easily
- turbo has better top end power, and does not rip the engine power to push it
- blow off valve and wastegate sound is the identity of a turbocharged machine

B)

 

[Hamgachan]

thanks guys for the explanation...

 

[lumghini]

altough supercharger maybe faster without lag...but i would go for turbo...like the lag and sudden 'stick to chair' feel...hehehe

 

[BLaCkHoWLiNG]

dont forget... supercharger is powered by the crank... so it actually consumes power while it generates power.. it's estimated that a 4AGZE's SC12 Roots Type supercharger sucks up 5-6hp when its electromagnetic clutch engages...

 

[Joeker]

Originally posted by BLaCkHoWLiNG@May 19 2004, 09:48 PM
dont forget... supercharger is powered by the crank... so it actually consumes power while it generates power.. it's estimated that a 4AGZE's SC12 Roots Type supercharger sucks up 5-6hp when its electromagnetic clutch engages...

Yes a SC regardless of roots or centrifugal, needs to be powered by the engines' pulley thus causing a parasitic drag on the engine (just like parasitic drag of the air con compressor, alternator, water pump, etc).

On the contrary, SC have VERY HIGH NED output as the turbocharger would've spun to the end of its compressor's efficiency map or the limit of its wastegate actuator (whichever first), the SC will still be blowing the engine it to kingdom cum.

 

[Boink Boink]

All True.

It would also help to think on what sort of course the car will be handling on.

If it is a long running course with gentle curves, then probably a turbo is the way to go. But if your running sharp corners with more frequent conditions where you seldom get to hit max RPM, then maybe an SC might be a better bet?

 

[trancebum]

'maintainability' of cos would have to be the supercharger. hardly any maintenance (compared to the turbo). VERY little lag and has very good and predictable torque curve through out the entire power band. also better response than turbo...generally speaking. however newer turbos (esp the bb ones) are very responsive too.

difference in both? like what most has mentioned here, the SC is pretty much fixed in terms of pressure boosting. not easy to increase boost. good thing about SC is for those who want predictable power (and also on the low/mid rev's power) for everyday driving around town. runs out of steam on higher rev's (unlike turbo).

soulfly has mentioned most of the advantages of turbo.

 

[Battousai]

Is S/C really more reliable than a turbo? The way I see it, S/C has more moving parts so there are more things that could go wrong compared to a turbo engine. Just that probably people tend to abuse a turbo more than an S/C. S/C also needs a special oil for lubrication while turbos just run on engine oil.

It's also a misconception that turbo gives free power. While S/C has parasitic drag, a turbo is also a MAJOR restriction in the exhaust flow. This could very well contribute to higher pumping losses in the engine, draining several horses as well.

But overall, I'd choose a turbo. I just think a snail looks better in your engine bay than a "root" :P

 

[trancebum]

Originally posted by Battousai@May 20 2004, 09:57 AM
Is S/C really more reliable than a turbo? The way I see it, S/C has more moving parts so there are more things that could go wrong compared to a turbo engine. Just that probably people tend to abuse a turbo more than an S/C. S/C also needs a special oil for lubrication while turbos just run on engine oil.

It's also a misconception that turbo gives free power. While S/C has parasitic drag, a turbo is also a MAJOR restriction in the exhaust flow. This could very well contribute to higher pumping losses in the engine, draining several horses as well.

IMHO...yes. S/C less hassle in terms of maintenance compared to TC. of cos i could be wrong.

i agree with you where SC has parasitic losses....TC has lag n also restrictions on the exhaust flow.

but to answer the question of this topic, which is better is matter of personal preferance...like in all matters (girls included :P )

justmy2centsworth....which is not much by the way... ;)

 

[soulfly]

Actually you can choose either one which you think is cool for you :lol:

But a machine with BOV sound is more cool am I right? :lol:

 

[trancebum]

as long as the BOV does not sound like 'plaaaaaaat'. like as if some one is farting. :lol:

 

[Joeker]

BOVs can also be used on SC engines.