Originally Posted by toast (Post 3220516)

Edelbrock really needs either an electronic bypass valve or a vacuum one with an adjustable spring so that you can tailor it to your needs.

Originally Posted by CSG Mike (Post 3220596)

Exact opposite. The quicker/earlier the turbo spools, the more load it puts on your rods and bearings, and the more you're stressing your engine.

No matter how well done the turbo setup is, turbo lag is a thing. It's just physics.

Originally Posted by CSG Mike (Post 3088470)

My GReddy builds boost quickly enough that quick blips for heel-toe downshifts build boost. I can have full boost before 3000 rpms regardless of conditions. Unfortunately an inertial dyno will not be able to show this, as loaded driving conditions and dynos are not quite the same.

Originally Posted by 86TOYO2k17 (Post 3220632)

But a turbo making 300whp and a SC making 300whp, wouldn't the turbo be stressing the engine less in regards to power output? As in 300whp on a turbo is say 350hp crank but 300whp on a SC is more like 370hp crank as the SC has much more parasitic loss to create the boost/power. Also the fact a turbo can make 300whp with less boost compared to a SC making 300whp. So your engine is effectively stressed less making less crank hp for the same whp, as well as your effective compression ratio is lower at the same whp level as you need less boost to make the same power.

also looking at torque curve of attached SC (DT) vs turbo (Drift Office) both making 300whp peak, however the SC is making a lot more torque sooner down low. Based on all the aforementioned I don't see how the turbo would be stressing the engine more.

also i never stated lag would be non-existent, i even stated on the pros and cons as a con for the turbo, however a good setup (especially if you don't want to make massive amounts of power) can drastically minimize lag to not be that big of a deal.



Edit: also adding JRSC / KWSC for torque curve/power delivery comparison. Looks a lot closer to a turbo then a positive displacement charger.

Originally Posted by B T (Post 3220619)

I thought you were working on one?

Originally Posted by bfrank1972 (Post 3220644)

That's certainly true. I think what they probably were referring to is the low RPM torque output. A properly sized/well thought out street turbo kit will build boost quickly at low RPM and put a lot of stress on the rods if you floor it at 3000 rpm. A centrifugal unit won't do that. The positive displacement units would likely induce more low RPM rod stress as well.

Originally Posted by Irace86.2.0 (Post 3220677)

^^^ Exactly. The turbo might have lag, yet it is load dependent, so it'll build boost, but the supercharger will just pud along until rpms increase enough to get boost, so it will feel like it has supercharger lag; this isn't accurate because there is no lag, but there is rpm-dependency-delay. In this regard, turbos can lead to lazy shifting, and superchargers require downshifting to get into bigger boost numbers, but when that happens the boost is instant, where downshifting in a turbocharged car will still have some lag, even with a small turbo.

Originally Posted by CSG Mike (Post 3220703)

Unless you keep your charge pipes pressurized between shifts like I do... or run some sort of anti-lag. :D

Originally Posted by toast (Post 3226108)

it sounds like I have straight cut gears when decelerating from 3-2k.