Turbocharger V Superchargers

[Need4Speed]

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.

[Need4Speed]

by the way the poll is supposed to say
Turbochargers OR Superchargers

[eyebrows]

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)

[fpv_gtho]

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

[henk4]

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.

[eyebrows]

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?

[AllAmerican ss]

Ok people here you go
Is it possible to have a super charger then a turbocharger taking out the 'wasted' air? and if so how much psi would it possibly have

and im not sure but i read that putting a big supercharger on a muscle car u need a big ass blower


[email protected]

[SilverArrowZ]

Supercharger use a belt to turn it. The setup is similar with the air-cond compressor on your car. They both use some power of your engine to run the compressor.

About using wasted gasses to turn the supercharger's compressor, i don't really have any idea. What i can think of right now is connect a belt to a (modified) turbocharger(which harness the power from wasted gas, and mount a normal size puley)

turbocharger are already spining at about 15000rpm (is it? i'm not sure) and normal ratio between the puley and the compresor are already big, you probably get 60000rpm on your supercharger .

With this setup, you probably get alot of horsepower or you are going to spoil your compressor. Ofcourse, if the setup work, but it doesn't seems to be logic for me, it just came out of my mind.

I heard of someone using both turbo and super charger under the same hood, they do it with their project car, i'm not sure about the performance. They say with that setup they can use a big turbo(with alot of turbo lag, but big output when it kicks in) and the supercharger take care of low rpm power. Thats what i heard, i never get to see the pic of the setup engine, i don't know, don't look at me.. aahh~~=.="

[KnifeEdge_2K1]

i didnt take the time to read all the other posts so im just going to submit my 2 cents

to me i think turbo chargers are superior to super chargers because of 2 things
- turbo's can generate more boost (they opperate at higher rpms which superchargers would have difficulty reaching since there is no "direct" connection between the turbine and engine crankshaft)
- today's turbo's dont suffer from turbo lag as much as the turbos of old because they integrate the use of lighter than steel components in the construction of the turbines which allow them to spool up at lower rpms

[Waatz]

Still say superchargers make more power. TOP FUEL!!!
Is Boost Directly proportional to power output? I dont know if it is. . . .. .

anyway everyone should read this.

http://www.nhra.com/streetlegal/funfacts.html

I want some proof that turbo's can compare to this.

[SilverArrowZ]

With aerodynamically enhanced carbon-fiber bodies that loosely resemble the production cars on which they are based, these supercharged, fuel-injected, nitromethane-burning machines travel the quarter-mile in 4.7 seconds at more than 325 mph, slightly slower than a Top Fuel dragster. Most teams use an aluminum version of the 426 Chrysler Hemi engine that produces an estimated 8,000 horsepower.

no need prove, these babies use nitromethane, and we are talking about normal petrol. These are already disqualify. Now turbo still rulez with majority post