View Poll Results: What’s better overall, Turbochargers of Superchargers?

Voters
54. You may not vote on this poll
  • Turbochargers

    26 48.15%
  • Superchargers

    25 46.30%
  • Both the same

    3 5.56%
Page 1 of 6 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 78

Thread: Turbocharger V Superchargers

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    75

    Turbochargers V Superchargers

    Lets discuss the difference between the two, chip in all you know about them and lets find out which one is better.

    Personally I thing turbo is more popular and efficient because it uses the energy in the exhaust stream for its power source, where as supercharges use the engine as the power source, and it is also usually more expensive (to install).

    And vote for what you prefer on the voting poll, Turbo or Super.
    Last edited by Need4Speed; 04-03-2004 at 01:19 AM.
    “Nothin like da feelin of da pedal 2 da metal”

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    75
    by the way the poll is supposed to say
    Turbochargers OR Superchargers
    “Nothin like da feelin of da pedal 2 da metal”

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    237
    i voted both the same even tho they rn't. ummm it depends on what ur looking for ie burnouts, 1/4mile, street racing, show. and it also depends on what engine u have ie 4cly V8 V6 etc. i can't really think of a way of finishing this so i let someone else just confurm what i said (i really hope im right other wise i just made myself look like an idiot)

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    St Marys Western Sydney
    Posts
    20,953
    theres different setups for different cars, engines and waht you want to use them for. for a V engine you would probably rather have a twin-turbo setup or a supercharger and if you wanted outright peak power you wight rather a single turbo as ive heard big single turbos give more power than 2 turbo's. if you want turbo and driveability though you'd go twin turbo
    I am the Stig

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Rozenburg, Holland
    Posts
    27,330
    For diesel engines turbo charging is the only option. For petrol engines the turbo option is probably also better, as it allows you to better manipulate turbo pressure. The mechanical compressor/superchargers have the advantages of immediate response, although turbo charging has been greatly improved over the years. I also have the feeling that turbo engines have higher output potential than supercharged engines.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    237
    Quote Originally Posted by henk4
    I also have the feeling that turbo engines have higher output potential than supercharged engines.
    that right. because it's bassed on how much ur engine breaths and if u get a big turbo its going to put through more fuel making more exhaust pushing the turbo faster and in the end u just get bigger power

    heres a question for u. how much potentail psi do u think this turbo has?
    Attached Images Attached Images

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Rozenburg, Holland
    Posts
    27,330
    Quote Originally Posted by eyebrows
    that right. because it's bassed on how much ur engine breaths and if u get a big turbo its going to put through more fuel making more exhaust pushing the turbo faster and in the end u just get bigger power

    heres a question for u. how much potentail psi do u think this turbo has?

    Which one of them?

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Location
    nr Edinburgh, Whisky-soaked Scotland
    Posts
    27,775
    Quote Originally Posted by eyebrows
    that right. because it's bassed on how much ur engine breaths and if u get a big turbo its going to put through more fuel making more exhaust pushing the turbo faster and in the end u just get bigger power
    Sorry eyeborws, but EXACTLY the same applies to a bigger compressor.
    But the power is taken out of the engine directly rather than by exhaust. There is a small advantage in that the exhaust is 'lost energy' anyway.
    But it's not significant as the power and pressures increase.
    You can't take all of the power out of the exhaust or you stall the gasses in the impeller. So there ARE limits
    "A woman without curves is like a road without bends, you might get to your destination quicker but the ride is boring as hell'

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Posts
    294
    I like them both (turbocharger sounds cooler ) but it depends on the car and the engine.

    I'd prefer a supercharger over a turbo, but a twin-turbo, now that i'd pick.
    Puff Daddy says his Ferrari 360 Spider can go 220 because the speedo says so
    *coughretardcough*

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Rozenburg, Holland
    Posts
    27,330
    If a I remember correctly the Lancia Delta S4 (the ultimate group B car) used both, although in Lancia terminology the supercharger was named Volumex and may have in slightly different way. Just wondering why noboby else has considered using the best of both worlds.

  11. #11
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    75
    Quote Originally Posted by eyebrows
    heres a question for u. how much potentail psi do u think this turbo has?
    i would say that turbos got about 8 psi?
    “Nothin like da feelin of da pedal 2 da metal”

  12. #12
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    237
    Quote Originally Posted by Matra et Alpine
    Sorry eyeborws, but EXACTLY the same applies to a bigger compressor.
    But the power is taken out of the engine directly rather than by exhaust. There is a small advantage in that the exhaust is 'lost energy' anyway.
    But it's not significant as the power and pressures increase.
    You can't take all of the power out of the exhaust or you stall the gasses in the impeller. So there ARE limits
    thanks. still learning, getting there though

    Quote Originally Posted by henk4
    Which one of them?
    the Big one
    Last edited by eyebrows; 04-04-2004 at 03:47 AM.

  13. #13
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Atlanta, Georgia
    Posts
    1,595
    I perfer turbocharging, because it uses wasted energy unlike a supercharger which feeds off energy being made by the engine. Although the supercharger does have better response than a turbocharger. However in the racing world this doesn't really matter since revs are kept high most of the time.
    VIVA FERRARI!!!!!!

    "Beer is proof that God loves us and wants us to be happy!" ~ Benjamin Franklin

    If everything's under control, you're going too slow ~ Mario Andretti

    "We can't stop here! This is bat country!" ~ [U]Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas: A Savage Journey into the Heart of the American Dream[/U]

  14. #14
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    S. California, USA
    Posts
    1,174
    Quote Originally Posted by Ferrari Tifosi
    I perfer turbocharging, because it uses wasted energy unlike a supercharger which feeds off energy being made by the engine. Although the supercharger does have better response than a turbocharger. However in the racing world this doesn't really matter since revs are kept high most of the time.
    Quoted from another forum...
    "there are 2 different designs of turbos, not one.. there is your typical turbo, and the ball bearing turbo. and a true ball bearing turbo has superior response to any supercharger, the ability to reach maximum boost ( anything from 15-50 psi depending on the engine and the size of the ball bearing turbo ) before 1800 rpm..an example of this is the incon systems turbo."

    You can read the whole THREAD here...

    I'm going to do a little research on this myself

  15. #15
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    missouri, stl
    Posts
    978
    If im not mistaken cant a roots style supercharger put out more tourqe?
    this is what if been told
    also if u have a muscle car (60's and 70's) theres noway in hell ur gonna turbo it, u got have the super stickin out the hood
    i'd like to point out most of the top fuel racers use roots superchargers
    Last edited by kko; 04-13-2004 at 02:06 PM.
    < 1 - 2 - to the bass >

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •