Turbo vs Supercharger
Discussion
Is a turbo going to be effective on a big low revving lump like the LS1 & 2?
Or is that the bad old days of turbocharging and things have moved on now with blow throughs and what not.
I see Monkfish are trialling one, what's the progress Roger?
If made to work properly would a turbo be more or less advantageous than a s/c?
Just musing upon next years car budget...
Or is that the bad old days of turbocharging and things have moved on now with blow throughs and what not.
I see Monkfish are trialling one, what's the progress Roger?
If made to work properly would a turbo be more or less advantageous than a s/c?
Just musing upon next years car budget...
Well - it depends really! Turbos are arguably better if you want to produce insane amounts of HP as they aren't really limited on how much air they can flow (obviously there's a cut-off but for some units this is touching 1000hp) and they don't rely on engine power to drive them unlike a supercharger. I think a turbo would work well on a big V8 because they have enough natural torque to minimise the turbo lag so they won't flat-spot like Evo's and Scoobies. On the other hand though Turbos require a lot more on-going maintenence and they have a lot of complex bits that are liable to break. Superchargers are literally just strap on and go - much easier if you ask me. Also a positive displacement supercharger like the harrop will give you bags of torque down-low as well so it'll feel like your driving a big block V8! 
If I were you it would be a supercharger every time, not least because Greens/Wortec and LSV are doing such awesome deals on them at the moment. A turbo is going to be far more expensive I would have thought....
If I were you it would be a supercharger every time, not least because Greens/Wortec and LSV are doing such awesome deals on them at the moment. A turbo is going to be far more expensive I would have thought....
Edited by Dan_S V8 on Monday 30th October 10:52
BigNige said:
Is a turbo going to be effective on a big low revving lump like the LS1 & 2?
Not sure about the relative merits, I believe it depends on your power objective.
As far as being effective, turbos work for these guys....
www.lingenfelter.com/05Corvette427tt1038hp.htm
Boosted LS1 also does a nice line in turbocharged LS1s.....but get in the queue behind me
Edited by harryoz on Monday 30th October 13:35
Turbo's should be more efficient because you dont get any parasitic loss on cruise and doesn't chew power on full-wack.
Having said that, charge temps should be lower with a decent blower - my [non intercooled] inlet temps were 50'c even on the coldest days off boost.
Eliot
Having said that, charge temps should be lower with a decent blower - my [non intercooled] inlet temps were 50'c even on the coldest days off boost.
Eliot
Edited by eliot on Monday 30th October 13:48
The Eaton M112 blower (used by wortec) does not suffer from parasitic losses while cruising because it is able to shut down (not quite sure of the mechanics of it lol) so no worries there... If I were you I would leave the supercharger on if you were going to sell it, from what I've seen modified monaros sell a lot more quickly than standard ones - not necessarily for more cash though.
Dan_S V8 said:
The Eaton M112 blower (used by wortec) does not suffer from parasitic losses while cruising because it is able to shut down (not quite sure of the mechanics of it lol) so no worries there... If I were you I would leave the supercharger on if you were going to sell it, from what I've seen modified monaros sell a lot more quickly than standard ones - not necessarily for more cash though.
LOL
I wouldn't say that too often around these thar parts ma boy!
BigNige said:
Is a turbo going to be effective on a big low revving lump like the LS1 & 2?
Or is that the bad old days of turbocharging and things have moved on now with blow throughs and what not.
I see Monkfish are trialling one, what's the progress Roger?
If made to work properly would a turbo be more or less advantageous than a s/c?
Just musing upon next years car budget...
Or is that the bad old days of turbocharging and things have moved on now with blow throughs and what not.
I see Monkfish are trialling one, what's the progress Roger?
If made to work properly would a turbo be more or less advantageous than a s/c?
Just musing upon next years car budget...
Of course they will be effective...
But what are you trying to achieve ? Obviously you have never driven a modern turbocharged car ? Do you think if supercharging was indeed better, OE manufacturers wouldnt have supercharged cars everywhere ???
Each have their good points and bad. But you need to specify your goals, before you can say one is better than the other.
Blue sky it, free wheel it, look outside the box of envelopes, give me your own opinion, not based around something someone else might say or what I might think etc...'tis the way the best discussions and ideas come about.
I would imagine that if superchargers were cheaper & lighter and less power sapping then more manufacturers would fit them as OE...which kind of makes me ask why people are saying turbos are/will be more expensive than superchargers for the LS1?
I would imagine that if superchargers were cheaper & lighter and less power sapping then more manufacturers would fit them as OE...which kind of makes me ask why people are saying turbos are/will be more expensive than superchargers for the LS1?
BigNige said:
Blue sky it, free wheel it, look outside the box of envelopes, give me your own opinion, not based around something someone else might say or what I might think etc...'tis the way the best discussions and ideas come about.
I would imagine that if superchargers were cheaper & lighter and less power sapping then more manufacturers would fit them as OE...which kind of makes me ask why people are saying turbos are/will be more expensive than superchargers for the LS1?
I would imagine that if superchargers were cheaper & lighter and less power sapping then more manufacturers would fit them as OE...which kind of makes me ask why people are saying turbos are/will be more expensive than superchargers for the LS1?
Again, depends what sort of kit, and what level of performance you are trying to achieve. WHo says they are expensive ? Are you comapring kits, with similar power outputs ? performance characteristics ?
Future upgrades ??
The GenT and GenTT kits arent that expensive, and the STS rear mount defo isnt expensive. A low power SC or Eaton type are also good value, but would either have the same potential as a turbo install ?, probably not.
Generally I would always say turbochargers are better. But then, why did I supercharge my car ?
I could make say 8-900bhp with both, but I chose the CF blower for its power delivery. A turbo install with teh same power would be quite vicious I imagine. Although you could map the boost to tame it a bit...but I didnt want that. Plus I'd never owned a supercharged car before.
Until you know what sort of performance you want, neither one is better than the other.
Turbochargers will easily last well over 100k if the engine is serviced properly. I dont know if the same can be said for most superchargers. I havent heard of too many SC vehicles covering those sort of miles yet. But I guess they should be capable of it.
A turbo setup can acheive pretty much anything any type SC will do, and in a lot of cases, do it better.
Except possibly a big twin screw. It will offer the best of both worlds. Big power and torque, with no lag. But unless you are aiming for over 600+, it would be very hard to justify the cost of a twin screw over a Eaton type blower, which will do pretty much the same job ( up to that sort of level anyway ), for a lot less money.
Some turbo installs may have some lag....but with such a big engine, it wont be an issue.
as stevie has put >600bhp go turbo anything less i'd go supercharged.
i went supercharged on cost per bhp - i dont really need more than 500bhp really - as a 'company' car the need for 750bhp on slippy north wales roads is a bit OTT - indeed 500 to 600bhp is a tad OTT.....but i like it :-) - may say differntly when the frost comes later this week :-( - time to get the kitcar out :-)
i imagine heat is a big issue where the turbo is sited in the bay?
marc
i went supercharged on cost per bhp - i dont really need more than 500bhp really - as a 'company' car the need for 750bhp on slippy north wales roads is a bit OTT - indeed 500 to 600bhp is a tad OTT.....but i like it :-) - may say differntly when the frost comes later this week :-( - time to get the kitcar out :-)
i imagine heat is a big issue where the turbo is sited in the bay?
marc
V6 JDT said:
Can you fit both?????????? 
just like a lancia delta group b? 750bhp from a 1800 in rally cross trim - so if a 6 litre..... hhmmmnn probably not worth doing as tyres and gearbox may be a limitation ;-)
to be honest IMO im pretty sure a well mapped good breathing modern turbo car is just as flexible as a twin set up (which is the main reason lancia went for it to overcome lag back in 1985) - things have moved on somewhat with mapping and injection...
Progress is good Nige.
Is it effective? You bet! Put it simply, a certain well known red maloo couldn’t outrun it!
Is it more advantageous than a supercharger? Well the replies above answer that I think. There is no wrong or right.
Can’t decide? Simple answer is to drive both! I have and I would be happy with either. They are a significantly different drive though. Make no mistake however, this is no lag monster. Nothing like scoobies or evos. Its still a 400bhp car off boost and a lot more when on boost.
We are nearly there now with the development. Nearly 10,000 miles has been accumulated during the development and we will soon be in a position to fit this setup to your car. Yes, its taken longer than we would like, but this is the price of making sure it is “right”.
In terms of power per pound, it will not be expensive, and it has proved to be very reliable upgrade.
As ever, you will be the first to know when it is finally complete.
Jeff, yes you can fit both, but I think would be overkill on an engine of this size. VW have done it on the new 1.4 Polo though.
Is it effective? You bet! Put it simply, a certain well known red maloo couldn’t outrun it!
Is it more advantageous than a supercharger? Well the replies above answer that I think. There is no wrong or right.
Can’t decide? Simple answer is to drive both! I have and I would be happy with either. They are a significantly different drive though. Make no mistake however, this is no lag monster. Nothing like scoobies or evos. Its still a 400bhp car off boost and a lot more when on boost.
We are nearly there now with the development. Nearly 10,000 miles has been accumulated during the development and we will soon be in a position to fit this setup to your car. Yes, its taken longer than we would like, but this is the price of making sure it is “right”.
In terms of power per pound, it will not be expensive, and it has proved to be very reliable upgrade.
As ever, you will be the first to know when it is finally complete.
Jeff, yes you can fit both, but I think would be overkill on an engine of this size. VW have done it on the new 1.4 Polo though.
Gassing Station | HSV & Monaro | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff