Turbo verses Supercharger
 

Trying to decide between turbocharged or supercharged. Is there anywhere on the forum that shows the pluses and minus of each?

There seems to be alot of different locations for the turbo housing due to limited space under the hood. A little concerned about being under the engine, with it being soo hot, is there a chance of housing failure with constant exposure to road water spray?

Last question - if turbo, what is the best value for the money/performance and the same for the supercharger.

thanks everyone.

What are your power goals? Do you have e85 available? What supporting mods do you have? What is your budget? Just some of the most basic questions to a help you choose between a diverse set of options.

I do not have any insight on the BRZ and FR-S as far as the boost options. But I have always Supercharged my past project cars if not already Supercharged stock. But this time around I intend to Turbocharge the BRZ. Supercharger setups seem to be an easier way to go, but they will not net the same power results due to them being parasitic as apposed to a turbo using already spent energy to make power.

In the end brother it is all up to hours of research, no one person can make up your mind for you but you. Just take your time and think about why you want to mod your car anyways, think about how you wish to use it.

there is about 10 threads on this already

Welcome to the forum. This topic has been discussed ad nauseam. Please search to see if any relevant threads exist before starting new topics. Here are the threads that you will likely find the answer to your questions in.

http://www.ft86club.com/forums/showthread.php?t=13354

http://www.ft86club.com/forums/showthread.php?t=43878

http://www.ft86club.com/forums/showthread.php?t=50816

http://www.ft86club.com/forums/showthread.php?t=30591

http://www.ft86club.com/forums/showthread.php?t=21182

http://www.ft86club.com/forums/showthread.php?t=261

http://www.ft86club.com/forums/showthread.php?t=39928

http://www.ft86club.com/forums/showthread.php?t=36946

http://www.ft86club.com/forums/showthread.php?t=36277

http://www.ft86club.com/forums/showthread.php?t=10921

/thread

Good on you I wasn't about to do all that. I thought about it though

Figured I'd do something while I sit on the toilet lmao

That is unless you intend on using the newer fandangled Electric Superchargers in which case you may have to replace your alternator to keep up with all the electronics.

Turbo vs supercharger= oh noes! Armageddon! !!

Just get nitrous. 200 shot, at least.

I will be supercharging my BRZ once I get accustomed to it and the warranty expires and or I build up my savings.

I already have the money put aside, but I wont risk voiding warranty.

I suggest supercharger due to the type of driving this car is designed for. Linear response and instant access to power makes it possible to flick the car in and modulate your line to the MM and push every ounce of useful grip in a corner. 300 wheel horsepower is quite possible through an intercooled supercharger. And in a 2,700 pound car this should put you in the low 12's EASILY ....and it will be an insane amount of fun. (superchargers also are less heat efficient ..every setup I have seen makes more power at less boost pressure on turbo versus supercharger, superchargers tend to blow hot air and have low volumetric efficiency and I dont know why)

Turbo systems have gotten a lot better in recent years but the fundamental problem is the same, incoming air is highly related to turbine speed and exhaust flow. The amount of power you get to the wheels is not directly tied to engine speed and your right foot.

I prefer to predict exactly what my right foot will do to the car at 10/10ths

Just something to consider. There is nothing "Wrong" with either, but depending on how you like to drive it is more important to learn the car at 10/10ths and then try seeing how different setups appeal to your style of driving. If you just care about powering away from corners down straight aways ..turbo is best. If you want that extra 5-10% of predictability and feedback from the throttle and push your lines supercharger might be right for you.

I am debating on whether or not I want to go with a supercharger kit $4,000+ or the OFT + Electric supercharger + E85 combo (around $2,200), which is less than half the price of a SC kit. Decisions decisions... I think I will go with the OFT + ESC + E85 combo.

Gotta get a sticker that says, "OFTPESCE85"

This post is exemplary, IMO. It's why the CSG car is supercharged. I suspect it's similar to why the Evasive car is Supercharged as well, because they have plenty of Turbocharger experience.

What you don't like spinning the car mid-corner when the b000000st kicks in? :mad0260:

SC vs Turbo
 

Appreciate all the advice. Linear power is what I want, get rid of that torque dip, maintain reliabilty, proabably around 250-275 BHP is enough. Budget <$5k. No track time. Those days are over since superbike racing.

My friend has one of those unqie twin turbo Supras MkIV with around 325 hp that I want to at least play around with on the road and twisties.

thanks

Then go with stg1 innovate

Sounds a supercharger is your solution. Here's some results with the Jackson Racing Supercharger, but the Innovate will do exactly what you want too.


Blue area = stock power
Green area = Gains from Jackson Racing SC + CARB tune, everything else stock
Red area = Gains beyond the CARB tune with a HKS EL header, catless front pipe, and custom tune.

http://i3.photobucket.com/albums/y75...ps1a2393fa.jpg

I just went through the same decision making process and ended up with the AVO kit. I found that it all came down to personal preference. The AVO kit seemed like the best choice for me when looking for an OEM type of setup that focused on build quality as much as power. It should put out around 240hp with their base tune, up to 280hp with a couple of supporting mods. I was actually just about to pull the trigger on an Innovate intercooled SC, but after reading about actual differences between the two methods, I went Turbo. Although huge power isn't my ultimate goal, I do like having a little head room in the power department.

EDIT: With that being said, I just want to add that you should chat with some of the forum vendors. They'll have first hand experiences with BOTH options, not just the one that they purchased.

Plus the torque seems to come on sooner with the turbo

That and they're powered by unicorn farts. Superchargers are made with conflict diamonds in Burmese sweatshops by 12 year olds, I'd never put one on my car.

I'm still in the deciding phase and will have to do some research on your claim, and if so I'm sure with you and would never purchase/install an SC in my car either.

But then I would think that someone has to manufacturer an SC here in the US. But I also plan to allow sometime for not only the R&D to be fully completed but for the after sales issues to be cleared up and corrected by the Suppkiers. And these cars are new and things are in a Big rush to market which IMHO isn't the best for the Consumers. But time will definitely tell which are the best and where the Manufacturing takes place.
As has been said somewhere before Patience Grasshopper. ;-)
Thanks for your input;)

easy. supercharger == quick fr-s. turbo == fast fr-s. questions?

;)

supercharger = whirrrr
turbo = ziiiiiing psssshhh!

Just to be clear.

Ex.
0-60 mph accel using boost ~ 6 seconds...at this point you have used less than 10% of the dump packs capacity...this is followed by ~45 seconds of recharge using the alternator @ 325 watts (23-25 amps), then it goes into trickle mode.

At no point will you need to replace your alternator.

If you require further explanation or examples of other devices that draw 23 amps LMK!

Rob.

Best response yet!!

@CSG Mike - being that a supercharger kit is the choice amongst your shop and others, why are other vendors deciding to go turbo - considering turbo seems to be more troublesome? Does a lower boosted SC kit make more sense for someone who wants that OEM like build (almost as if the car came stock with a SC)?

Both turbo and supercharger setups can be made to run like an OEM setup, but superchargers are more prevalent because all the supercharger manufacturers (Innovate, Jackson Racing, Kraftwerks, Vortech) are in California, so they have a strong interest in making the car CARB legal. HKS is an exception, but they don't really market much here either.

Our decision to use a supercharger was due to our concerns about cooling with a turbocharger setup. We can tuck away all the hot exhaust pipes with a supercharger; you can't with a turbo unless you mount the turbo at the bottom. We also wanted transient response, and a CARB legal setup (we're also in California, and you don't EVER want to get an emissions ticket out here).

If you want something that sounds, drives, and has the fit and finish of OEM, Jackson Racing is the way to go. With the CARB tune, you'll be ready to go. Even better, the CARB tune can and will compensate for better gas (92/93/100 octane), resulting in better power if you have access to fuel better than the 91 we have in California.


Of the vendors here that actually do any sort of track testing with their cars, only Element Tuning uses a turbocharger, and their car has been down for quite a while now. To be fair, their car isn't down because of the turbo setup, but an oil line failure (may or may not be a part of the turbo system).

AVO turbo placement alleviates all of CSGs concerns with heat. Picking the proper turbo for your desired results takes care of the rest. Turbos are much more configurable than SCs (placement, powerband, etc). One thing I haven't seen mentioned is the difference in fuel economy. A properly setup turbo generally nets better economy as well.

With that all being said, I am still intrigued by the SC offerings for a DD car.

Why not both?

Well this thread has swayed me towards a SC than turbo

My best advice is find someone with a turbo car and someone with a sc car. Drive both and see what you like. I've driven both turbo and sc cars and prefer a properly sized turbo for many reasons.

With linear power, you won't feel the power as much as a turbo. turbo lag makes you feel faster. shaving seconds off the track, SC is probably better. street fun, I say turbo. most local guys says the sc is hard to feel the power because its so linear. it reminds them about the power boost hen they drive a n/a 86. DD ability? just stay off boost hen you drive, my car feels fine.

for what its worth, i think the rotrex units arent much like more conventional superchargers and because of that it will have less of the supercharger downsides. from what i gather that fancy oil in the planetary drive system can provide the efficiency of a turbo (maybe even mor efficient) while building boost at a lower point simillar to a centrifugal. then again, its all over my head so...

It's not turbo lag that makes a turbo car feel faster - it's the fact it's making more torque, sooner, than the s/c is the reason it feels faster.

There are more superchargers at the track in California because of CARB, not because they are faster. I'm still curious why people believe turbochargers are impossible to drive around a corner well at the track when all of the best time attack teams/shops are running them here in Japan. The only reason that particular story came up in the first place was because of the old turbo porsches which were indeed an absolute bitch in the corners, but that is also because the engine was hanging out behind the rear axle...

@AVOturboworld do you plan on updating to a rolled flange on the turbo inlet and tbolt clamps in the future? Those are the only things I've been leery about with your kit.

You can keep your mouth shut and be thought a fool or open it and remove all doubt.
You did not choose wisely.

Will the O/P please fix the title?
It sounds like turbos are writing odes to superchargers.
The word is "versus".

The rapid change in torque (caused by the turbo spoolup) and larger overall torque output is what makes the turbo car feel faster.

It's because Time Attack in Japan is quite different from Time Attack in Cali. Our tracks are not as well maintained, and we have a massive street tire class, whereas the Japanese tuners generally are using some sort of r-compound or slick.

I agree that power comes on more suddenly, but you are exaggerating a bit or you've never driven in a well setup turbo car. I am talking more street wise, which is how most people will drive these cars almost 100% of their lives.

Now track wise, turbos can be set up quite well to not be peaky or too sudden. However, superchargers will always inherently have slower/smoother power delivery. But this is somewhat negated on a track where revs are generally in the mid to upper range.

Different drivers will prefer one over the other depending on a lot of variables.

Apart from all the turbo vs s/c pros and cons, what will make me choose s/c at 90% is that I can keep mostly my N/A mods.

I mean, I buy 1000+ header while I'm N/A and then I have to throw it away if I go turbo? Damn that's insane. Probably it's because I don't live in America and I don't really see any real way to sell the used header. Turbo can be fun, ppl love it for the torque it has, passenger love it for the sensation it gives.

It all depends on what kind of power delivery you like. I'm in love with N/A engine and I don't really care about being pushed back in the seat I much prefer a continuous delivery of power with no lag because doesn't matter how good is the turbo, there will be a bit of spool time.