Turbo verses Supercharger

[reesmicm]

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

[ramiram1984]

Then go with stg1 innovate

[CSG Mike]

Originally Posted by reesmicm

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

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.

[protpibe]

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.

[SkAsphalt]

Originally Posted by protpibe

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

[DoomsdayJesus]

Originally Posted by SkAsphalt

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.

[subwaynm]

Originally Posted by DoomsdayJesus

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

[jamesm]

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

[bfrank1972]

Originally Posted by jamesm

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

supercharger = whirrrr
turbo = ziiiiiing psssshhh!

[Robftss]

Originally Posted by LBC Por Siempre

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.

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.

[Bushman7140]

Originally Posted by jamesm

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

Best response yet!!

[1086]

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.

@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)?

[CSG Mike]

Originally Posted by 1086

@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).

[shaunsweeney]

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.