Why Supercharged Instead of Turbo?

[WHITE]

Originally Posted by wparsons

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.

Full-race's efr kit has an option to use a 6258, and it has a pretty short run of tubing.


Im sure if you talk to alot of the guys making kits they'll work with whatever turbo you want for a reasonable price.

[CSG Mike]

Originally Posted by AVOturboworld

I understand the concept, I disagree with your overstating how bad it is. You attempt to make it sound like it's uncontrollable in corners, yet there is an amazing about of turbocharged race cars at the circuit that do just fine. Do they have the same transient response of the supercharger? No. Does it affect their ability to get to the podium? No.

Again, fully developed race car, vs a turbo kit on a street car. Apples and oranges. I can make a massive list of differences, but do any of these race cars make street car power, and use street tires?

[AVOturboworld]

Originally Posted by CSG Mike

Again, fully developed race car, vs a turbo kit on a street car. Apples and oranges. I can make a massive list of differences, but do any of these race cars make street car power, and use street tires?

Well, I don't see many street cars on street tires making it to the podium at a actual sanctioned race event, outside of 1-make series. Which would of course disallow turbocharger or supercharger upgrades. But I'm sure you are very aware of that.

I use professional drivers as a reference point, because amateur drivers in street cars is not something I'll use as an example due entirely to driver error. Especially at the track. I've seen people lose control mid-corner in a 100hp n/a car mid-corner in broad daylight. I watched a guy roll an NSX up a hill (and we all shared a moment of silence afterwards).

But just to clarify, which turbocharged street car with street tires did you drive at the track that was uncontrollable in the corners?

[CSG Mike]

Originally Posted by AVOturboworld

Well, I don't see many street cars on street tires making it to the podium at a actual sanctioned race event, outside of 1-make series. Which would of course disallow turbocharger or supercharger upgrades. But I'm sure you are very aware of that.

I use professional drivers as a reference point, because amateur drivers in street cars is not something I'll use as an example due entirely to driver error. Especially at the track. I've seen people lose control mid-corner in a 100hp n/a car mid-corner in broad daylight. I watched a guy roll an NSX up a hill (and we all shared a moment of silence afterwards).

But just to clarify, which turbocharged street car with street tires did you drive at the track that was uncontrollable in the corners?

My choice of word was unpredictable, not uncontrollable. Important distinction; don't put words in my mouth. If it was completely predictable, I'd have no issues with it. I know exactly how the throttle will respond, every time, with a NA/SC car.

But, using your professional drivers as a data set, if asked if they'd rather have a 450tq/300hp restricted NA/SC engine, or a 450tq/300hp turbocharged engine, I think they would all universally pick the NA/SC engine. Would you disagree with this, somewhat anecdotal statement?

At the end of the day, throttle response (transient response) of a turbocharged car is *not* the same as a NA or SC car. Nothing will change the laws of physics, no matter how badly you want it to. At least, not with the technological means we have today.

[ztan]

Originally Posted by CSG Mike

My choice of word was unpredictable, not uncontrollable. Important distinction; don't put words in my mouth. If it was completely predictable, I'd have no issues with it. I know exactly how the throttle will respond, every time, with a NA/SC car.

Originally Posted by TurboBRZ

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.

Not sure why you'd be considering the most painfully obvious example of shifting 2nd-3rd WOT mid corner unless you wanted to destabilize the car regardless of induction type. I find the throttle response above 3000rpm quite predictable and controllable with my Greddy T518Z kit and accurate throttle control.

[CSG Mike]

Originally Posted by ztan

Not sure why you'd be considering the most painfully obvious example of shifting 2nd-3rd WOT mid corner unless you wanted to destabilize the car regardless of induction type. I find the throttle response above 3000rpm quite predictable and controllable with my Greddy T518Z kit and accurate throttle control.

[ame="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XU4Sa3RCCV4"]Willow Springs International Raceway BRZ/FRS/GT86 lap record 1:30.778 - YouTube[/ame]

Skip ahead to 1:06. Let me explain what exactly happened there.

Downshift to third. Turn in. On-throttle. Unexpected understeer, so a quick lift to destabilize and rotate rear. Immediately back on-throttle. Expected power is not there, and expected rotation does not continue due to lack of thrust in the rear. Add front steering input. Turbo spools as steering input is made, and breaks rear loose. Countersteer to correct unwanted rotation.

And, some lap times to validate the lap in the video, from fastestlaps.com


Pos Make / Model Time Year Power (hp) / Weight (kg) Driven by
1. Porsche 918 Spyder 1:23.54 '13 887 / 1640 Randy Pobst
2. Chevrolet Corvette Stingray Z06 1:25.00 '15 659 / 1598 Randy Pobst
3. Lamborghini Huracan LP 610-4 1:25.17 '14 610 / 1422 Randy Pobst
4. Nissan GT-R Nismo 1:25.70 '15 599 / 1720 Randy Pobst
5. Chevrolet Corvette Stingray Z06 1:25.76 '15 659 / 1598 Randy Pobst
6. McLaren 650S Spider 1:25.88 '14 650 / 1468 Randy Pobst
7. Dodge Viper SRT-10 ACR 1:26.00 '08 608 / 1536 Dominik Farnbacher
8. Chevrolet Corvette Stingray Z06 1:27.10 '15 659 / 1598 Randy Pobst
9. Porsche 911 Turbo S 1:27.17 '13 560 / 1605 Randy Pobst
10. Porsche 911 GT3 1:27.22 '13 476 / 1425 Randy Pobst
11. Chevrolet Camaro Z/28 1:28.40 '13 507 / 1702 Randy Pobst
12. Callaway Corvette SC627 1:28.61 '15 636 / 1605 Randy Pobst
13. Porsche 911 50 Years Edition 1:28.93 '13 400 / 1410 Randy Pobst
14. Chevrolet Corvette ZR1 1:29.69 '08 647 / 1530
15. Chevrolet Camaro Z/28 1:29.72 '13 507 / 1702 Randy Pobst
16. Nissan GT-R 1:31.23 '08 480 / 1740 Steve Millen
17. Dodge Viper SRT-10 1:31.28 '08 612 / 1567
18. Lamborghini Gallardo LP560-4 1:31.32 '08 560 / 1530 Steve Millen
19. Chevrolet Corvette Z06 1:32.06 '05 513 / 1437
20. Lamborghini Gallardo Superleggera 1:32.47 '07 530 / 1520 Steve Millen
21. Dodge Viper GTS 1:32.81 '97 457 / 1580
22. Dodge Viper SRT-10 1:33.10 '05 506 / 1600
23. Porsche 911 GT3 RS 1:33.14 '06 415 / 1375 Steve Millen
24. Audi R8 4.2 FSI Quattro 1:33.20 '06 420 / 1560 Steve Millen
25. Porsche 911 Turbo 1:33.31 '09 500 / 1570
26. Porsche 911 GT2 1:33.57 '07 530 / 1440 Steve Millen
27. Ariel Atom 3 1:34.00 '08 300 / 456 The Stig
28. Lamborghini Gallardo Spyder 1:34.32 '06 520 / 1748 Steve Millen
29. Dodge Viper ACR 1:34.90 '99 466 / 1525

[AVOturboworld]

Originally Posted by CSG Mike

My choice of word was unpredictable, not uncontrollable. Important distinction; don't put words in my mouth. If it was completely predictable, I'd have no issues with it. I know exactly how the throttle will respond, every time, with a NA/SC car.

Oddly enough, I can say the same with our turbo setups. But I recognize that not all turbo or s/c setups are equal. And yes, I see a lot of the kits are more concentrated on peak power than area under the curve, so I can it being a bit more of a pain in the corners than a turbocharger setup that's already in the middle of it's torque area.

Again, this sounds awfully like a personal preference deal, and I'm 100% behind that.

But, using your professional drivers as a data set, if asked if they'd rather have a 450tq/300hp restricted NA/SC engine, or a 450tq/300hp turbocharged engine, I think they would all universally pick the NA/SC engine. Would you disagree with this, somewhat anecdotal statement?

Only partially. What they universally say is they'd rather have the 450tq/300hp n/a motor over s/c or turbocharged.

It's not so anecdotal, I had an A racing license in Japan and was involved with said drivers for several years, from several different countries. I've had that discussion on and off for decades. I have to be honest here, though, they never mentioned superchargers. It's probably an American thing.

At the end of the day, throttle response (transient response) of a turbocharged car is *not* the same as a NA or SC car. Nothing will change the laws of physics, no matter how badly you want it to. At least, not with the technological means we have today.

And the S/C isn't the same as pure N/A. There is an impact to the response thanks to that belt that actually powers the S/C unit. We can circle around this endlessly, but nobody would willingly supercharge or turbocharge the engine if the power we wanted was already there in n/a form.

And nothing will change the fact that, once you move past the endlessly repeated transient response argument, the turbocharged car will have far more torque available far earlier on, right where people daily drive their cars, or right where somebody is trying to power out of a corner.

Which *is* why some people prefer turbochargers. Even at the track!

And to provide evidence that a turbo fr-s doesn't explode spontaneously at the track!

Youtube vidya:
[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ut55yR2Yu8M"]New Toyota GT86 TURBO vs McLaren MP4-12C - YouTube[/ame]

[swarb]

Randy Pobst> @CSG Mike >Steve Millen it has been confirmed.

[chaoskaze]

I'm pretty sure in a properly setup car in a hand of a professional isn't that far apart. Because all settings are dialed in for the particular track & driver. No?


For regular dudes like me, ya that's another story.

[AVOturboworld]

The fact that the Stig is near the bottom of the list tells me it's bogus!

[Draco-REX]

I've driven big engine N/A cars, I've driven turbocharged cars, and I've driven PD supercharged cars. I would rather have the response and power of a big N/A engine. But failing that, I'd rather a PD Supercharger over a turbo charger.

Can the lag of a turbocharger be driven around? Yes. But that doesn't mean I have to like it. I bought this car to DRIVE. Reducing throttle response with a turbocharger is, in my opinion, counter to the nature of the car. A supercharger, especially a PD unit, compliments this car.

Would I go turbo on my BRZ if I could do it over again? Definitely no.
Would I go supercharged on my next RallyX build? Also no.

Each has pros and cons that will work better for a specific application.

[KoolBRZ]

I'll have BOTH! I have a good used Garrett T28 off a GTR, and I'm getting a Phantom SC in the next month or two. I plan to use the Garrett as a muffler and rear-mounted turbo, feeding into the Phantom SC up front. Intercooling via the typical FMIC, oversized to prevent restriction. I have the Procede controller, and I want to set it up to control both the ESC, and the turbo WG. If it works as planned, I could have kits available to ESC owners. The theory is, boost starts with the ESC, up to about 4000 RPM, when the T28 kicks in and supplies the extra boost needed to keep the pressure up clear to redline. The ESC only provides 3-5 PSI, which drops off over 4000 RPM, while the rear-mounted turbo can supply up to 1.2 Bar, or 16 PSI, which I will probably limit to 7 PSI.

[wparsons]

Originally Posted by Yoda

Get a quote from a shop you maybe surprised how close it will be at least for down here in south Florida. I can get a custom kit with tune for about 4k.
Food for thought.

You're not getting a custom kit with the kind of turbo I would want for $4k, the GTX or EFR turbos are almost half that alone.

Originally Posted by WHITE

Full-race's efr kit has an option to use a 6258, and it has a pretty short run of tubing.


Im sure if you talk to alot of the guys making kits they'll work with whatever turbo you want for a reasonable price.

And it's $6500, compared with $4000, for the same power output. It's just not worth $2500 more to go turbo over supercharger to get ~260-270whp.

Like I mentioned, there's literally no e85 at pumps here (and buying e85R by the barrel is out of the question ), so I'm limited to ~300whp anyway.

[glamcem]

Originally Posted by Draco-REX

I've driven big engine N/A cars, I've driven turbocharged cars, and I've driven PD supercharged cars. I would rather have the response and power of a big N/A engine. But failing that, I'd rather a PD Supercharger over a turbo charger.

Can the lag of a turbocharger be driven around? Yes. But that doesn't mean I have to like it. I bought this car to DRIVE. Reducing throttle response with a turbocharger is, in my opinion, counter to the nature of the car. A supercharger, especially a PD unit, compliments this car.

Would I go turbo on my BRZ if I could do it over again? Definitely no.
Would I go supercharged on my next RallyX build? Also no.

Each has pros and cons that will work better for a specific application.

especially when our cars already suffers in that department in stock form :/