Well what one do you like better

i like superchargers better

Turbos are much more efficient, and in the end will make more top-end power. Supers are more usable for daily driving though. I love the sound of a turbo spooling up, but I hate turbo lag. I like my engines to be responsive.

that's where twin turboes come in, one samll one to limit lag, and a big mother fucker for top end.

i didn't know that....that's awesome...

Twin turbos rock!

rahter have super. i need something to get me to school and back without killing me :lol:

that's where twin turboes come in, one samll one to limit lag, and a big mother f****r for top end.

tu shey 8)

(no idea how to spell that)

You're right, twin turbos are very nice and have very little lag.

i still rather have and s/c

back in WWII Pratt&Whitney(or was it Wright? I can't remember) toyed around with a turbo-supercharger; it was basically both rolled into one - it was belt driven to eliminate lag, but when the exhaust was sufficient, it was run by turbine. not sure how it ever worked out, but seemed pretty interesting to me.

That'd be hot if they could work that out a turbo-supercharger. If you're ever bored you should try to find somethin on it and post it. I'm curious as to how it would work

Turbo most definately!

There is still such thing as twin-charging... using a supercharger and turbo at the same time, kinda like twin turbo's. I remember reading in a issue of SCC quite a while ago that they were going to try and twin-charge a Mini Cooper S. That would be pretty sweet, all the response of a super with the high end power of a turbo.

this wasn't a supercharger plus turbo setup, it was actually(this is highly simplified) a turbo, with a belt attavhed to the compressor side; I'm assuming it had some sort of clutch to disengage the belt at higher rpm.

I don't really care.

Only ever drove one turbo before--a Daytona with a 5 speed. Kinda fun WHEN the turbo kicked in. Sure took awhile though.

Drove my Aunts 3800 S/C Regal. Good torque. Not much up high but I expect the engine has more to with that then the S/C alone.

So I don't care, either would do.

i like both and dislike both, i like supercharges but only centrifugal superchargers, not roots. centrfugal are easier to intercool/aftercool, and has a powerband of a turbo, with less lag. but it takes power to operate it.

turbo's are cool but dont like the heat build up, they get too hot. boost creap, and turbo lag. but they are verry upgradable and has more potential.

for allaround power, good for street/strip, supercharger all the way (vortec)

Turbo's sounds nicer, but the lag kinda kills it. More top end power in the turbo so thats where i stand.

Lag and creep are features of poorly designed or improperly sized turbos, for street applications. The itsy bitsy turbon on my SRT makes 12psi at 2200 RPM. That's plenty quick to spin the tires. Big "drag" turbos will have some lag (on our small displacement 4 cylinder engines), but its a tradeoff. You can't make big power on small displacement engines without some sort of sacrifice.

Creep is caused when there isn't enough flow through the wastegate. Not all turbo systems creep.

I'm a turbo guy, but I'll be interested to see how much power we can squeeze out of the SS/SC setup.

Agreed, properly sized turbos don't lag, and have way more potential than a supercharger, plus the save on gas.

I wish the Cobalt SS was t/c'ed :(

Agreed, properly sized turbos don't lag, and have way more potential than a supercharger, plus the save on gas.

I wish the Cobalt SS was t/c'ed :(
Easily converted, I'm sure. Considering the Bonneville car was T/Ced..and so is their NHRA FWD Pro car, I believe.

supercharger


"vanishing point" cop on radio- we have reason to believe its supercharged

haha that movies sick if you havent seen it its hard to find but definitley worth the effort ... you'll want to buy a challenger within the first five minutes

"mad max" i love it when he has the lever on his stick to engage the supercharger....you can't beat the noise they make

besides tv....i love superchargers that stick out of the hood on rearwheel drive cars.....though the cobalt isnt its a bit of an american muscle throwback and is def hotter then a turbo

performance wise no lag....

I've driven my friends SRT4 and the turbo is BADASS but i've also raced a few GTP's in my SVT Focus and hearing that SC scream is awesome! All i've gotta say is.....

STILL WAITING ON THE SCREAMER!!

I want my damn Cobalt SS/SC... :lol:

we have developed and tuned a twincharger kit for the Cooper S and plan on one for the Cobalt SS as well. check out the link!

http://www.cobaltss.net/forums/showthread.php?p=7007&posted=1#post7007post7007

Clutched S/C kits, in the style of Mad Max, is the only way to go. :D There's one produced for the Probes I'm going to pick up one day.

Mmmm... twincharging.

Mark - have you guys looked at ION Redlines at all yet? I'm wondering about the intercooler setup on these cars, as you probably know they have a laminova air-to-water setup integrated into the intake.

I'm wondering if this will be a limiting factor in the amount of power we can safely attain from these cars, and if we will have to go to FMIC if possible to do mods such as your twincharger system?

Mmmm... twincharging.

Mark - have you guys looked at ION Redlines at all yet? I'm wondering about the intercooler setup on these cars, as you probably know they have a laminova air-to-water setup integrated into the intake.

I'm wondering if this will be a limiting factor in the amount of power we can safely attain from these cars, and if we will have to go to FMIC if possible to do mods such as your twincharger system?


Generally Laminova Intercoolers have the best efficiency 86% from the data I have seen. These are also quite expensive intercoolers, in my opinion chevy did right by going with an intercooler design such as this. Even so once we get our cobalt ss we're going to take a look at the IC system to see if any areas can be improved. :D

Awesome. Thanks for the info!

i like superchargers better

yea i agree i think superchargers are better then turbo chargers b/c with a turbo charger, u have to wait a few minutes for the pressure in the enigne to build up b4 flooring the pedal down. although superchargers are murder to gas milage, but hey, gas milage isnt what matters, its the performance!!!

yea i agree i think superchargers are better then turbo chargers b/c with a turbo charger, u have to wait a few minutes for the pressure in the enigne to build up b4 flooring the pedal down. although superchargers are murder to gas milage, but hey, gas milage isnt what matters, its the performance!!!

Well, as most serious T/C tuners will tell you "With the right setup for your engine, there won't be any lag." While there might be SOME lag, it'll be inconsequential. So, in my opinion, it comes down to a matter of preference.

Me, I'm going S/C because everyone else is going T/C. I like to push the envelope with unpopular methods just to be different, and to see if I can prove the other crowd wrong. :)

I used to love turbos (all my freinds had WRX's and Turbo Audi A4's) until I went into my freinds Supercharged 64' Olds 442..never want another turbo. I love the power right there and then. Twinchargers are great although, I met a guy who showed me his twin charged MR2 (it was un a tuner magazine a year ago I believe) If they develop one of those, Id probably maneuver in that direction. He said on his MR2 he gained alot of power on the low end, with still considerable difference in the higher RPM's. Seems like it works well to me

I used to love turbos (all my freinds had WRX's and Turbo Audi A4's) until I went into my freinds Supercharged 64' Olds 442..never want another turbo. I love the power right there and then. Twinchargers are great although, I met a guy who showed me his twin charged MR2 (it was un a tuner magazine a year ago I believe) If they develop one of those, Id probably maneuver in that direction. He said on his MR2 he gained alot of power on the low end, with still considerable difference in the higher RPM's. Seems like it works well to me

Yeah, I'd be interested in a Twin Charger design. Even if that incorporates a Tubo, it'd still be different than most and I like the concept.

I read on ****************** that the M62 S/C takes 50hp to run at full boost. I am very skeptical about this number as it infers that running a turbo at 12 lbs of boost would put the 2.0L S/C at around 250hp to the wheels. However it is true that S/Cs require a lot of power to compress the intake air, and overall a turbo would be more efficient top-end power.

Twin-charging is looking like a great solution if it is economical enough though!

All i can say is I can't wait for S/C's for the 2.2 and 2.4L engines. As much power as the 2.0 is producing, I would guess without the super its less (maybe 135-140). Imagine the power differences on even the 2.2L, with a well made supercharger you could be running 12 psi constant, with 270-290hp. Obviously we'll have to see what becomes of the Cobalt market, but I think that the more base engines have more potential.

Superchargers have become a lot more...advanced in the last decade or so. As I recall, those numbers have been steadily dropping. It's probably less popular and efficient on smaller engines for those reasons...but figuring out how to make it work, and perhaps, overcome those limitations..now there's a worthy goal. :D

Yes it definitely would be great to get big numbers out of the Cobalt using a S/C. Something different then the norm, hearing S/C scream instead of turbo's spooling up.

I definitely like the sounds of a large turbo and the open wastegate :)

but psi-fis twincharge concept is cool...it worked great on their mini.

All i can say is I can't wait for S/C's for the 2.2 and 2.4L engines. As much power as the 2.0 is producing, I would guess without the super its less (maybe 135-140). Imagine the power differences on even the 2.2L, with a well made supercharger you could be running 12 psi constant, with 270-290hp. Obviously we'll have to see what becomes of the Cobalt market, but I think that the more base engines have more potential.

i think they talked about that in another section of the forum.. Chevy said the other engines dont handle as well as the 2.0....

i personally like S/C systems as compared to a Turbo...i have ran both and liked the SC...also when it comes to blowers i perfer the centrifugal procharger blowers. there is many advantages of a turbo and as the same with the turbo...

Also evenstar you are right...the 2.2 ecotec motor will make more power then the 2.0 motor as it has more cubic inches and .5:1 more compression...if you run the same boost that you run on the 2.0 on a 2.2 it makes 230hp compaired to the 210hp....

But either way any power adder is fun!

Ok i just bought a Base Cobalt and I was looking into turboing it, thinking i woiuld be saveing money rather than buying an SS. ( Well actually i cant afford an SS but Im happy with my buy) Or am I just kidding myself?

So heres my questions:

By putting a bolt on turbo kit that gives you maybe 8-9 psi of boost, would that give you more horsepower than the SS S/C?

And would it really be saveijng money in the long run.

If its a bolt on turbo kit do u have to do anything else to the motor to make sure it holds?

Tubo all the way for performance.

i don't know.... its a tough call, cause I owned a Talon TSI before I bought my SS/SC.... and they both have there advantages and disadvantages..... and its really a tough decision. And I don't know if every body has driven both a turbo and supercharged cars...but they are both great....gotta love forced induction.

http://www.shepracing.com/videos/8.55@176.9.mpeg



Well granted its AWD but seriously i dont think you would see this being done if it wasnt a Turbo... I meen, I dont even know of a supercharged 4cyl running in the 9's or 10's.

I love everything about turbo. They are a little more high maintanence but if you buy the right stuff and tune the car they are insane. Last night we finished tuning a civic, 5psi 195HP and the thing felt like a rocket. It really felt alot faster than 195 but I know the dyno doesnt lie. My buddy with a tiburon is supercharged and I got a ride in a cav supercharged and neither of them scared me or got my heart pumping. Turbo just feels violent.

For what I need I choose a Supercharger.... hands down...

i dont understand why i put down the s/c, it is very nice if u think about it for street/drag because instead of all the time it takes to wined up the turbo, the s/c has already kickd in and is moving. i mean yea the turbo is nice but id go with the s/c for street/drag just because of the power it pushes out in so little time compared to the t/c :bow:

Turbo of course! A supercharger uses power to make power :) Oh well, everyone has their own opinions. For some cobalt turbo kits though: www.maximumboost.net

If I could make a supercharger, I'd sell them too though :)

Depends on your needs.

Set, forget, smog legal - Supercharger

Ulimate Power - Turbo

Its REALLY that simple and since GM is about to offer a supercharger and Hahn a turbo kit, its not really that hard to think about.

Supercharger!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

As much as i love Turbo's. I'd take a Twin Screw supercharger over them every day of the week.

turbo's all the way. superchargers are cool to have the power right then and there. but in the long run more potential on a turbo. all you have to do is build the motor up and adjust the fuel delivery system and up the boost. more power right there. supercharger you have to build the motor and bigger supercharger and it has a limited potential. about up to 15psi. or so. a turbo i've seen them up to 44PSI on a car and about 30-35 on a turbo diesal. they use wasted exhaust gases instead of off the crank. and the wastegate feature is great for higher altitudes. helps control the boost to get the most out of it. it increases and decrases the boost to keep it at stable levels.

get a sequential turbo which is a smaller turbo for low-end power and a bigger turbo for high end power. more piping to run. and more valves to control direction of exhaust gases.

they have centifugal (spelling??) turbo's which is a turbo set up but instead of a turbine that uses the exhaust gases there is no turbine but a shaft with a pulley on it connected to the main belts. which is connected to the crankshaft. it has it's ups and downs.

but i prefer the standard turbo set up. i like the sound and the kick it gives when the turbo's kick on. i like the lag only if it's a small lag. cause when you slam on the gas car barely moves then a second later it takes off and throws you in your seat. especially on a high boost big compressor turbo. i like the feel a turbo gives.

so in the end i think turbo's are better. what i think.

i think turbos are better as well but superchargers on a v6 or v8 are pretty decent too, ona 4 cylinder i would always choose turbo

As much as i love Turbo's. I'd take a Twin Screw supercharger over them every day of the week.

Yeah Whipples!!! :)

Can you put a twin tubro on a 4 banger as long as you put the turbos on the same side like they do on skylines and supras with the straight six? Just to stay on subject I like the sound of a turbo, but don't know much about them. I've only had my ss s/c for 2 weeks so I don't know much about s/c either.

i don't imagine there being enough exhaust to power two turbo's with only 2.0L of displacement.

I ment not just the 2.0L but any 4 banger.

Short answer. NO.

twin turbos ona 4 is for show purpose only it wouldnt help you go faster and even ona supra they switch out the twins for a single anyway since 1 is better than 2 for 1/4 mile times

i've seen a single turbo supra push out 1000+ yes a 1000+ HP. and a twin turbo supra run about 700+HP not too bad. and i saw a tri turbo supra run about 800+HP it's in the 800's just don't remember the exact numbers. and the tri turbo isn't even 2 cylinders per turbo. it's like 1 and a half.
on any good set up you want to have at least two cylinders per turbo. i've seen a quad turbo but on a V12. thats 3 cylinders per turbo. which is good and decent. but 4 cylinders per turbo is where it kicks ass. seen a twin turbo V8 mustang push about 935hp can't remember if thats at the wheels or not.

they switch to a single turbo because cheaper easier less piping less weight and generate same horsepower. plus it's nicer to run one turbo at full boost then two turbo's. the single turbo supra has about an 18g turbo and threshold is a little higher since it's so big. but when it kicks in the boost climps the gauge so quickly. and it generates so much power it's insane. you slam on the gas you don't go anywhere then about a second or so later you get slammed into your seat and you stay slammed into your seat until the boost keeps climing to peak boost. and it'll last a lil while. which is why i love turbo's.

turbos rock

SC's can make alot more than 15psi but efficiency starts to degrade. and that instant torque makes driving around town fun as hell. vortech rates their sc's max psi at the point where eff is at 60% but they can go further. turbos have that lag problem but not the parasitic loss, my powerstroke likes to wait about half a tick before it kicks when i stomp on it. and theres also that heat. im still divided on what im doing to my 351. id love a big 14-71 blower hangin out there.

Gravana was supposed to be working on a turbo kit that bolts onto the ss/sc for some twincharger action. havent heard anything else about it. and VW is supposed to be coming out with a twincharged 1.4l motor making 175hp soon.