turbo vs supercharger
Thread Starter
New Member
Joined: 06-10-06
Posts: 140
Likes: 0
From: Magnolia, Arkansas
turbo vs supercharger
hope i dont get burned for this so here goes. i've read and heard a lot of people who would choose a turbo charger over a supercharger and vice versa. i roughly know how they both work, but am unsure as to which i would prefer the most. i would just like to know the differences between the two a little more and the pros and cons of both and how people think the chargers would affect our cars (besides making them go faster). if anyone, who is in the know, would be so kind as to educate me on this i'd really appreciate it. im sure im just one of many in this situation, i just happen to be one that decided to finally ask.
New Member
Joined: 05-25-06
Posts: 181
Likes: 1
From: New York
^^ A little ignorant, but whatever. A supercharger is nothing more than a power adder - like cams or high-flow heads. There's nothing wrong with preferring an NA engine, but calling a FI engine "cheating" isn't exactly accurate.
Supercharger - robs some power from the engine, but makes great low-end power, and there's virtually no lag.
Turbo - technically still a supercharger, but runs off the exhuast and uses no engine power to run. They have a longer wait time for the power, and generally do better in higher rpm situations, but newer dual-scroll untis are pretty good on both fronts.
There's the quick rundown.
Supercharger - robs some power from the engine, but makes great low-end power, and there's virtually no lag.
Turbo - technically still a supercharger, but runs off the exhuast and uses no engine power to run. They have a longer wait time for the power, and generally do better in higher rpm situations, but newer dual-scroll untis are pretty good on both fronts.
There's the quick rundown.
Senior Member
Joined: 11-10-05
Posts: 2,477
Likes: 0
From: USA
Supercharger: Power throughout the band, robs some engine power (parasitic loss), (typically) more reliable
Turbocharger: Power at higher RPMs, Turbo Lag i.e. you don't make all the power off the line, can achieve more power than supercharger with high boost and tuning, (typically) less reliable than s/c
That's a VERY basic breakdown, no need to flame me and say how a supercharger can make just as much power as a T/C.. you're probably right, but what I'm talking about is generality.
Turbocharger: Power at higher RPMs, Turbo Lag i.e. you don't make all the power off the line, can achieve more power than supercharger with high boost and tuning, (typically) less reliable than s/c
That's a VERY basic breakdown, no need to flame me and say how a supercharger can make just as much power as a T/C.. you're probably right, but what I'm talking about is generality.
Senior Member
Joined: 11-22-06
Posts: 1,505
Likes: 0
From: Orlando, FL
I know this is going to open up a can of worms, but---
in a nutshell, heres what I understand --
turbo -
pros -more efficient, easy to tweak (twist of a knob), quiet, potential to produce more HP everything else being the same.
cons - lag (not as bad nowdays), sudden rush of power rather than gradual, not as reliable, high maint., prof. install recommended. Non on the market on CARB legal or are eligible for CARB without further modification by supplier which is still rumored to NOT be in production.
supercharger-
pros - low maintainenance, nicer power curve, can be installed in the garage. A look at the Vortech site shows that their superchargers are CARB legal. supercharges are easier to get CARB'd due to it being run by pully rather than exhaust gases that need to be recaptured.
cons - whine sound (I think is cool, but annoying to some), pulley driven therefore has more parasitic loss, not as easy to tweak (involves changing out pulleys), not as "upgradable" as a turbo.. for future HP gains.
it sounds like the supercharger would be better for the daily driver,low maint, most garage mechanics can tinker with it.
while the turbo would be for the guy who loves to tinker with his car (has the know how to tinker) and has plans for future enhancement and also doesn't mind the maintenance required to keep a turbo at peak performance.
ok--- throw in your 2-cents!!!
in a nutshell, heres what I understand --
turbo -
pros -more efficient, easy to tweak (twist of a knob), quiet, potential to produce more HP everything else being the same.
cons - lag (not as bad nowdays), sudden rush of power rather than gradual, not as reliable, high maint., prof. install recommended. Non on the market on CARB legal or are eligible for CARB without further modification by supplier which is still rumored to NOT be in production.
supercharger-
pros - low maintainenance, nicer power curve, can be installed in the garage. A look at the Vortech site shows that their superchargers are CARB legal. supercharges are easier to get CARB'd due to it being run by pully rather than exhaust gases that need to be recaptured.
cons - whine sound (I think is cool, but annoying to some), pulley driven therefore has more parasitic loss, not as easy to tweak (involves changing out pulleys), not as "upgradable" as a turbo.. for future HP gains.
it sounds like the supercharger would be better for the daily driver,low maint, most garage mechanics can tinker with it.
while the turbo would be for the guy who loves to tinker with his car (has the know how to tinker) and has plans for future enhancement and also doesn't mind the maintenance required to keep a turbo at peak performance.
ok--- throw in your 2-cents!!!
Thread Starter
New Member
Joined: 06-10-06
Posts: 140
Likes: 0
From: Magnolia, Arkansas
thanks for the info guys. if the turbo involves more mantience than a supercharger, but provides more hp, where as the supercharger is exactly opposite, what do you think about the new eaton supercharger coming out in comparison to the turbos that are out for us?
Senior Member
Joined: 01-05-06
Posts: 10,877
Likes: 2
From: East Brunswick, NJ
Ok, the thing that just makes me a little aggrevated is the people saying "turbo lag" or insinuating such a thing.
Let me explain...
Being that your turbocharger runs off your exhaust from your engine, the amount of exhaust "energy" is what determines how fast or slow it will spin an turbocharger. Now, it might determine the speed of it but ultimately, the size of the turbine on the turbocharger is the other piece to the puzzle. If you put an very large turbocharger on an smaller 4 cylinder engine, yes, there will be more of a delay as far as trying to reach your max amount of pressure BUT this does not mean that the turbocharger does not move.
People need to understand that even at idle, a turbocharger is spinning. It's the speed of the turbocharger (turbine and compressor) that help determine how much pressure is being created inside the compressor housing. Turbochargers can spin as fast as 100,000 RPMs and more. What people need to do is just understand that your turbine isn't at 0 RPMs and shoots up to 100,000 RPMs...this is what people exaggerate to sometimes and it's incredibley false.
Turbochargers act the same way as superchargers in a sence. They are using a way to make pressure higher in your combustion chamber. Highly pressurized air is denser. Denser air has more oxygen molecules. More oxygen molecules present in the combustion chamber, the more fuel you can supply, the stronger the "explosion" or ignition and the harder force is created on the top of the piston.
Honestly, the whole pros and cons thing isn't much and kind of hard to say what is a pro and con cause to some people what might be a con might be a pro for others. When you start looking into fully how both of them work then you can make this decision for yourself and not rely on a forum to pick which type of power adder you want. Myself, being that I owned a turbocharged vehicle and have done all types of research and am still pursuing to find out more about turbocharged systems, I prefer them cause they do exactly what I want and I understand fully (atleast the basics) of how they work.
Also, I read alot about people saying "We have instant boost". What is the need of having boost pressure at 2000 RPMs? There honestly is none. Why do you think people are having enough time launching at the track. This is why some people choose turbocharging with a larger turbocharger. They want to somewhat delay. Me personally, I'd rather be at full boost at 3,000 RPMs and hold it strong till redline rather than build pressure and finally see my max pressure before I shift.
Someone mentioned that turbochargers are efficient...this is true and so is their form of air cooling. Lets just use a roots supercharger for this example: A roots superchargers job is to create pressure inside the intake manifold, then as your valves open up, this pressurized air enters the combustion chamber and so on and so forth. The problem with this is that pressurized air is for one hot and with hot pressurized air, you should have a way of cooling it...so people use Air to Water intercoolers (aftercoolers). Problem with ATW systems is that your pressurized air is going to be cooled as cool as the "water" being used is. Being that everything is connected and located in your engine bay, heat is absorbed and transferred to everything, including the water that is cooling the charged air. Air to water coolers for this reason of being more complex, are less efficient. So you have a less efficient type of forced induction and less efficient type of air cooling system.
With this said, this does not necessarily make supercharging a bad thing. It serves its purpose. If you're the type of person who wants to push 250 or 275 crank horsepower with your M62 charger and not have to worry about it, this could be the way for you. You might like the instant boost feel. This is why I say, it's all preference.
I could go on and on (and I'm probably that bored to) but overall, do your research, find out what you want out of your car and find out how both forms of forced induction work. Don't rely on other people or people on forums as far as picking one (example: get a turbo cause it's better). What you'll run into is just plain biased opinions...form your own opinion. It's your car and your money, use YOUR brain.
If you need any help, just ask. Good luck.
Let me explain...
Being that your turbocharger runs off your exhaust from your engine, the amount of exhaust "energy" is what determines how fast or slow it will spin an turbocharger. Now, it might determine the speed of it but ultimately, the size of the turbine on the turbocharger is the other piece to the puzzle. If you put an very large turbocharger on an smaller 4 cylinder engine, yes, there will be more of a delay as far as trying to reach your max amount of pressure BUT this does not mean that the turbocharger does not move.
People need to understand that even at idle, a turbocharger is spinning. It's the speed of the turbocharger (turbine and compressor) that help determine how much pressure is being created inside the compressor housing. Turbochargers can spin as fast as 100,000 RPMs and more. What people need to do is just understand that your turbine isn't at 0 RPMs and shoots up to 100,000 RPMs...this is what people exaggerate to sometimes and it's incredibley false.
Turbochargers act the same way as superchargers in a sence. They are using a way to make pressure higher in your combustion chamber. Highly pressurized air is denser. Denser air has more oxygen molecules. More oxygen molecules present in the combustion chamber, the more fuel you can supply, the stronger the "explosion" or ignition and the harder force is created on the top of the piston.
Honestly, the whole pros and cons thing isn't much and kind of hard to say what is a pro and con cause to some people what might be a con might be a pro for others. When you start looking into fully how both of them work then you can make this decision for yourself and not rely on a forum to pick which type of power adder you want. Myself, being that I owned a turbocharged vehicle and have done all types of research and am still pursuing to find out more about turbocharged systems, I prefer them cause they do exactly what I want and I understand fully (atleast the basics) of how they work.
Also, I read alot about people saying "We have instant boost". What is the need of having boost pressure at 2000 RPMs? There honestly is none. Why do you think people are having enough time launching at the track. This is why some people choose turbocharging with a larger turbocharger. They want to somewhat delay. Me personally, I'd rather be at full boost at 3,000 RPMs and hold it strong till redline rather than build pressure and finally see my max pressure before I shift.
Someone mentioned that turbochargers are efficient...this is true and so is their form of air cooling. Lets just use a roots supercharger for this example: A roots superchargers job is to create pressure inside the intake manifold, then as your valves open up, this pressurized air enters the combustion chamber and so on and so forth. The problem with this is that pressurized air is for one hot and with hot pressurized air, you should have a way of cooling it...so people use Air to Water intercoolers (aftercoolers). Problem with ATW systems is that your pressurized air is going to be cooled as cool as the "water" being used is. Being that everything is connected and located in your engine bay, heat is absorbed and transferred to everything, including the water that is cooling the charged air. Air to water coolers for this reason of being more complex, are less efficient. So you have a less efficient type of forced induction and less efficient type of air cooling system.
With this said, this does not necessarily make supercharging a bad thing. It serves its purpose. If you're the type of person who wants to push 250 or 275 crank horsepower with your M62 charger and not have to worry about it, this could be the way for you. You might like the instant boost feel. This is why I say, it's all preference.
I could go on and on (and I'm probably that bored to) but overall, do your research, find out what you want out of your car and find out how both forms of forced induction work. Don't rely on other people or people on forums as far as picking one (example: get a turbo cause it's better). What you'll run into is just plain biased opinions...form your own opinion. It's your car and your money, use YOUR brain.
If you need any help, just ask. Good luck.
Thread Starter
New Member
Joined: 06-10-06
Posts: 140
Likes: 0
From: Magnolia, Arkansas
wow njhk, that was pretty informatitive. from what i've read, the turbo charger fits my style more than a supercharger. redfocz said that they were higher maintience and not as reliable. tonio5555 said they werent as reliable either. can you (or someone else) ellaborate on that more?
Senior Member
Joined: 01-05-06
Posts: 10,877
Likes: 2
From: East Brunswick, NJ
Originally Posted by Cipher117
wow njhk, that was pretty informatitive. from what i've read, the turbo charger fits my style more than a supercharger. redfocz said that they were higher maintience and not as reliable. tonio5555 said they werent as reliable either. can you (or someone else) ellaborate on that more?
Also, how you drive makes a difference as well, just like any car, don't beat on the car constantly.
Other than that, there isn't much maintenance besides looking under your hood every so often to make sure things are connected alright, no boost leaks (well you would see a drop in pressure if there was on your boost gauge), excess oil and things of that nature. Just setup things good initially and thats all you really have to do on a regular basis.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post