Call me a NOOB, Differences between Supercharger & Turbo?

[VADER]

What do you guys think a Turbocharger would cost for a car like this?

[2forme]

Originally Posted by FR-S Dan

What do you guys think a Turbocharger would cost for a car like this?

AVO's kit is 3800$ That's the cheapest I've seen, but also the best quality IMO.

[Pete]

Originally Posted by 2forme

AVO's kit is 3800$ That's the cheapest I've seen, but also the best quality IMO.

Definitely the best turbo kit for a daily driver that I have seen. If I go with a turbo I am going with AVO.

[arucard77]

I'm personally watching D3's. I've already talked with Dave and we should have details soon on that setup.

[FreshFRS]

Originally Posted by mhigham

and spinning a supercharger is no easy task - that is power that the crankshaft sees and your wheels don't.

Just as a reference - the new Mustang GT500. Its SAE rated at 662HP, but it takes an additional 150HP @14PSI to spin the blower. So the crank is seeing 800+HP of force. The next generation is rumored to be turbocharged (ecoboosted).

depends on the mechanical efficiency and size of the SC in question. our car will take maybe 40-50hp to run at 1.0Bar due to the smaller size of the rotors and higher mechanical efficiency >86% For an Eaton TVS R1320 (probably not much more with the smaller ones)

Audi also uses the R1320 on their 3.0 v-6 which gets best in class fuel economy vs. 2 turbo cars and some bigger N/a motors.

[JDMenrique]

Originally Posted by FR-S Dan

What is better for an automatic..?

I drove a 2006 Honda Civic that I boosted for six years with an auto tranny. I had no problems. My suggestion to you would be maintain your boost low. I was at 6psi while the 6MT guys were doing 10+. Very fun to drive.


ALSO...

If you have a smaller turbo (not looking for a dyno machine), then the lag is virtually non-existent. My torque jumped off after about 2,500 RPM. I'm biased, I say turbo.

[VADER]

Oh wow almost 77% voted Turbo. I didn't think there would be that much of a one-sided lead! And so AVO is the best route to go as of now, BUT should I wait and see what else is offered after SEMA?

[Lammie]

Sema is almost over, I'd just wait to see what else comes out. Personally I'm leaning towards turbos because you can adjust your fuel economy better. You can drive at low RPMs and not spool the turbo whereas with the SC it's always on.

[serialk11r]

Originally Posted by Lammie

Sema is almost over, I'd just wait to see what else comes out. Personally I'm leaning towards turbos because you can adjust your fuel economy better. You can drive at low RPMs and not spool the turbo whereas with the SC it's always on.

It's actually the other way around, SCs are bypassed/declutched when not under load, while the turbo is always giving a little extra bit of restriction to the exhaust.

[Tansey86]

I'm surprised SC got so many votes, especially for a Subaru boxer engine, ive only ever seen them turbod.

Would be interesting to see a scion with toyota badges, a Subaru motor, and a centrifugal supercharger. True Frankenstein.

[ANTI_LAG]

From my experiences this is the difference, people buy superchargers then always regret it and want a turbo setup, people that buy turbochargers are just happy..

Superchargers you can upgrade pulley, maybe a cooler on a centrifugal charger, but a turbo system everything can be upgraded. The 4 cyl supercharger market just isint as good as the V8 market, turbo really is the way to go, although if you want a very specific power then a supercharger will fit the bill, great for road racing, but if your planning on hitting the streets and banging some gears, plan on the turbo cars walking on you.

And don't think you buy the supercharger kit and your done, you still need a very well designed header with large collector, and all the exhaust needs to be in larger diameter, so there's still some definite added cost to it.

[ANTI_LAG]

Heres a very efficient setup I did on a S2K some time ago, science of speed kit, using a air to water cooler and a paxton charger, made good power, but even it got walked by the turbo S2Ks rolling around, and this kit uses a nice big charger!

[madfast]

Originally Posted by ANTI_LAG

From my experiences this is the difference, people buy superchargers then always regret it and want a turbo setup,

and these guys are usually chasing dyno numbers and not at your local SCCA auto x or track day...

people that buy turbochargers are just happy..

superficial "happiness" imo. they like the power but live with the slower responses. SC on the other hand, love the response but live with the lower power. as long as you know what you're getting yourself into, you will not be disappointed...

The 4 cyl supercharger market just isint as good as the V8 market,

and THAT'S the main reason why they're not as popular. not because they're bad, but because few companies ever try to make a good kit. chalk it up to the people who chase dyno numbers who will never buy a SC no matter how good the response is, no matter how flat the tq curve is...

but if your planning on hitting the streets and banging some gears,

really? REALLY?

[FreshFRS]

Originally Posted by ANTI_LAG

Heres a very efficient setup I did on a S2K some time ago, science of speed kit, using a air to water cooler and a paxton charger, made good power, but even it got walked by the turbo S2Ks rolling around, and this kit uses a nice big charger!

the problem is that the turbos even a gt30R (twinscroll .91A/R full spool @ ~4200) that i had in my S2k had a better midrange 5-7k than my buddies Comptech kit. i made ~470, he made ~490 (same dynojet same hour.) but i walked on him every race. (driver mod FTW)