Why Supercharged Instead of Turbo?
 

For as far back as I can remember I have been a turbo driver. If my car didn't come with one, I bought an engine that did and swapped it in, or added one to it. To me there is just nothing like the feeling when the boost kicks in around 3-4k RPM's when you get sucked back into your seat.

But I see a lot of members on this site who have gone with a Supercharger install instead of a turbo, and rather than asking them each individually what their reasoning is I thought I would make a thread.

For those of you who don't know, Superchargers require adding an additional pulley onto your engine which creates more drag on the engine and therefore power is robbed from the engine to create forced induction - to create more power. To me this has always seemed inefficient, as my goal is solely to increase HP, not take HP to make HP. Turbos on the other hand run off exhaust gases and do not rob HP from the engine to make HP - and thus turbo'd engines tend to be more economical in terms of fuel economy (and they typically make more power from the same amount of boost).

So for all you supercharger guys out there - what was your reasoning for going Supercharged instead of Turbo? I'm obviously missing something and am looking to be educated. :thanks:

Personal preference. The sooner you accept that people will do what they want despite what you think they should do, the happier you'll be.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

This thread is not about what I think they should do, it is asking WHY you prefer a supercharger. My happiness comes from my own car - not from what other people do to their rides.

Obviously the choice to go with one or the other is a personal preference for anyone - but I've stated my reasons for why I've always been turbo so I'd like to know why your preference is supercharger. For example maybe you like the more flat hp and tq curves and the steady rise to boost instead of it kicking in all at once? This is a reason for a preference, not just a cop-out response.

OP are you going to have a heart attack if I tell you I'm planning to go electric supercharger?

/sarcasm

Depending on where people live they may have to be CARB certified and IIRC there is not a turbo kit out that is CARB certified.

Typically an SC will give you better response down low. I'm speaking in very general terms here and not trying to get into the whole "just size your turbo properly and this won't be a problem debate"

Typically less maintenance

Not everyone is looking to make big HP and an SC fits the more modest power crowd.

Just my 2 cents.

To specifically answer your question,

I didn't know whether to go Turbo or SC. There's just too damned much information out there to learn about the pros and cons of both. BUT, the biggest drawback on both (for me anyways) is cost. The kits plus the add-ons required is a LOT and this is my daily-driver. I want more oomph, but not so much pocket ouch!

Eventually I heard about the Phantom Electric Supercharger that seemed the perfect fit for me; It's about 1/2 the cost of traditional Turbo/SC, doesn't require supporting add-ons, easy install/removal and the boost is instant torque at the low end (which is exactly what I want). So now I'm on the wait list for one to see if it lives up to the hype.

Thank you for educating me. I had no idea that in order to do IIRC your car has to be CARB certified. Makes sense to go Supercharger in that instance if there is no CARB certified turbo kit available.

Also I hadn't really though about the maintenance before - that's another good point. :w00t:

Throttle response, less heat, cruise torque, linear power curve, more predictable power delivery, sound, space requirements, most have no chance of boost spikes, many don't require circulating engine oil through them, less plumbing.

None of these reasons necessarily apply to all SCs, but these are some common reasons. There are ups and downs for both.

Please refrain from jumping in and saying "OH YEAhh bro??!!? Mah turbo Haz a linear torque curVE!!!!" I'm speaking "generally" and this does not cover every individual case.

The WORKS stage 2 turbo is now CARB legal :D

^^ This!

The massive surge of power when the turbo spools can be fun in a straight line, but makes putting power down on a track VERY tricky.

Supercharger power delivery is way more predictable at part throttle, and the throttle response is better.

You could use a much smaller turbo than most kits use, but then you're also dealing with the extra heat from the turbo in the oven we call an engine bay.

Does any of this matter for pure street cars, no. But it makes a massive difference on a track.

How many laps of boost will you get out of that bad boy?

Wasn't tricky for me. As long as you realize there is an area between 0 throttle and WOT, and it is your job as the driver to utilize that area.

Well it recharges the battery after every pull, so you get 90 seconds of 5 PSi of boost and then 20-30 seconds of recharge time.

If you use the Procede controller, it's always on. More like having a beefier engine.

I second that motion. When you know your car, when it boosts, how it boosts and how to shift and maintain your RPM goldilocks zone, then it's not very tricky at all in a turbo car. But I've never driven a SC car to compare - from that standpoint the SC may be easier or faster to learn how to control than a turbo.

And how much extra power does it generate with the 5psi? Also what is the cost of the electric SC kit?

Around 210 - 220 WHP and 190 FT/LB Torque with the OFT Tune and 91 Octane, for around $2K.


http://www.ft86club.com/forums/showthread.php?t=39719

If I were to add one, it would definitely be a Supercharger, primarily for simplicity and the bottom end (off the line) boost. I don't particularly care for the "turbo lag" boost at a certain RPM, I want my power off the line from the beginning.
It seems that one of the biggest complaints about the 86 is just the thing a SC provides some correction for and a TC would exaggerate. To me a TC actually creates the "lag" in other cars that people complain about in the FR-S.
That said, there are definitely advantages/disadvantages to both, and you have to figure out which one best fits your style. Since mine is a daily driver, I want the off-the-line kick in the pants.

Murica! Is why. End thread/

I agree with the top part minus the heat/sound/space requirement stuff cuz if you're comparing a JRSC/KW to turbo, still lots of piping and it doesn't sound as good -- heat wise, IAT's are probably similar between the two.. but comparing turbo IAT's to an uncooled, or even cooled roots/twin screw blower? forgetaboutit, those puppies cook the air coming in.. **different platform but my uncooled m62 IAT's were well over 200 after a hard 1-4 pull on 10psi, now on 6psi turbo the IAT's maybe get to 120 after the same pull, same weather, and the car is making 40hp more**


+1 for a properly installed and tuned turbo kit. since it seems so many have had issues from junk installs or poor part choices like too big of wg springs..

hashtag stig pls.

You need to specify you want a non centrifugal supercharger where as most of the supercharged FR-S/BRZ owners are currently running one of the three centrifugal supercharger kits.

What turbo were you running, and how much boost? What I don't like about a turbo mid corner is that at part throttle power delivery isn't always predictable depending on load, etc.

See, anyone who replies to what I said and then claims "it doesn't sound as good".........ugh. Nevermind.

I will clarify that when I said "heat" I was also including engine bay temps. Something FA5teryo apparently didn't think about.

This isn't really true. Nothing is free. Your turbo runs off of back pressure. What generates back pressure? Your engine.

Your engine is having to work harder to expel the exhaust gas out vs NA motor.

its all been mentioned already but...
the two main reasons for me were simplicity and nazi california CARB. the turbo kit i'd like is just way too illegal to run here as a daily, maybe one day i'll switch it to a turbo...

I don't think you can beat the simplicity of the JR supercharger kit. theres not much to the system and thats great, I work with engineers and they over complicate things all the time. just add 1 pulley, add the supercharger, add the (not complicated) piping, intercooler, a simple bypass valve. the best part to me is that the supercharger has its own closed oiling system... a reservoir, a filter, a cooler, and the supercharger does the oil pumping. This is my first car that I've done more than wheels and suspension (herra frush yo) I enjoy modding cars and I decided this is a better stepping stone than going to a more powerful turbo setup. maybe my next car after this will be more intense. or maybe i'll keep this car for a long while and end up building the engine + turbo when I have a new daily.

This question comes up regularly.

Transient response, and heat management.

A turbo can create "more" power, and a fatter powerband, but it comes at the cost of throttle response (the turbo needs to spin up to create boost, whereas a supercharger is already spinning at the necessary speed and is always making boost), and heat (all that extra piping is extra heat in the engine bay).

Not quite.

Lets say your turbo kit spools at 3500 RPM.

Lets go to 6000 RPM in 3rd gear. Now, lift, and let the RPMs start dropping. When you're at 5000 RPMs, stomp on the gas pedal. How long is that delay between when you stop on the gas, and when you actually have full boost? You're in that "goldilocks zone", but you *still* have to wait for the turbo to spin up. Your power is always there with a SC or NA car.

My wrx has more midrange power, but the gradual and steady rise of power you get with a centrifugal supercharger was a big selling point to me.

Had 2 turbo cars previously, so I knew what to expect with a turbo setup.... had to try the supercharger route and do not regret it one bit.

I just don't get the people who try to convince others that superchargers are a waste, a turbo does everything better, etc.
Maybe it does depending on your viewpoints, but we should all be able to agree that the power increases are welcome... no matter what the torque curve looks like.

Why beat up on the electric supercharger guys when they are seeing increases and are happy?

If you are happy with your kit and others are talking crap about your choices or don't understand you, then I believe YOU are the one doing it right. If you build your car to impress others or gain the approval of random people on the Internet, you will quickly find that you can't make everyone happy.... but you sure as hell can make yourself happy

Just for shits and giggles, I recommend you go test drive a 2015/2016 WRX. You'd be impressed with the new engine.

I have neither (yet!), but am considering SC, specifically the Phantom ESC, for two reasons: 1) throttle response and 2) heat under the hood shortening the life of engine components such as hoses, belts, etc.

I really should, the Ej205 is an archaic pig compared to modern engines

2015/2016 wrx is an fa20di-t. Unless you already knew that and were making a remark about how the new wrx engine is better then the ej205, in wich case disregard my post.

For aftermarket:
Simplicity.
Less potential for failure with less parts.
Less potential heat issues.
Centrifugal system, a good design has very low parisitic loss.
" " , gentler onset of extra torque easier on driveline
" " , doesnt drastically change the personality of the engine

On the other hand, I prefer turbo if it is factory equipped as the details are most likely ironed out for dependability, eg: I have a 2015 WRX

I was referring to the engine in my 2005 wagon, it's all good :thumbsup:

It is not intended to be run on a track. It is not designed to handle the duty cycles it would see on a track and you are typically on gas too often on the track for it to recharge. I was on the waiting list and spoke to Rob and Fenton both about tracking it, as that was the primary use of the car by the time I had the opportunity to buy. After speaking with them, I passed and will go the JRSC route in time.

That usually happens when too large of a turbo is run. We've done extensive tracking (in several countries!), and mid-corner control is not an issue, because the turbo is spooling from 2000rpm onwards, not 4000+ onwards.

A proper turbo setup works great at the track, just as a proper sc setup would. But it's always easy to pick out examples of each that don't.

I wish someone made a GT25x based kit (or similar sized EFR turbo). I don't want 350+whp, and don't want that much headroom just adding lag. No e85 up here, and no interest in a lower compression block. A solid 260-270whp would be perfect, and for off the shelf solutions the supercharger kits are the best option.

I'm running a GTX3076R on my S2000. Boost was as high as 10 psi during the weekend.

I'm pretty sure you can get full blown or any of the reputable shops to make you a kit based on it even a local good reputable shop.

like others mentioned transient response (this may be very critical at the track and mimic lift-off oversteer) ..also there are so many different variations of each options (turbo vs SC), positive displacement, centrifugal type, journal bearing, ball bearing, single vs twin scroll ..list goes on.. each has their pros and cons so one size doesn't fit all

if you're ultimate goal is to make big hp then turbo it is, never really understood why people choose this platform to begin with, if that's what they're after though :)

I also want uber short charge pipes, and an IC core sized to my hp goals.

Basically all custom minus maybe the manifold if the flange is compatible with the turbo I would end up picking.

In all honesty, if the Greddy kit was available with a more modern (and smaller) turbo it would be pretty damn close.

It sounds like you have a great plan. As long as those lower HP numbers meet your goal, then I would just buy a Greddy kit. I am sure there is a way to get a GT25 on that kit. The only reason I didn't go with the Greddy kit on my S2k is that I knew I would want more HP on the street than it could provide, but it would have supplied the perfect setup for the track.