So the age old question supercharger or turbo. Recently saw this video and wanted your opinions. I was surprised to see the turbo make 200+ hp more than the supercharger. I mean I know that turbos are supposed to make more hp in theory, but damm!

^^LINK TO THE VIDEO^^

 

Superchargers has a tremendous amount of parasitic drag on the engine. Turbos are harnessing wasted heat and exhaust flow energy to make power. A turbo still robs a little power but it is peanuts compared to what a blower robs.

 

it doesnt take that much power to drive a blower. its more likely the case of comparing a medium sized blower to a large turbo. kinda like comparing an eaton m62 to an efr 7163, or the other way around, a k04 to a tvs 1900

 

Mighty Car Mods just did to build related to this.

They built two Miata's to almost identical specs. SC was better for autox due to the more linear powerband and turbo was faster.

 

Pretty much everything I've ever read states roots blowers will take 15-20% to drive. That's not insignificant, you lose that much through a transmission. There are cases of blowers bending and snapping crank snouts. That's some force.

 

the k04 is said to have maximum flow of 36lb/min at 24 psi. The m62 has maximum inlet flow of about 36lb/min at 14k rpm (basically stage 3 pulley) but yet the k04 makes a significant power difference. Even at lower boost levels than 24psi.

 

Plus, roots blowers are just air pumps. the compression happens in the intake manifold in the LSJ IIRC.

"boost" does not equal power. boost is just a measure of air restriction. which is why 10 psi on an efr 7163 will be faster than 10 psi on a k04.

 

Very true.


There are many different reasons to choose one or the other. Between similarly sized SC and TC the SC will have less "lag" and there fore is going to be better for when constant changes in engine speed are needed. For consistent acceleration and speed a turbo is going to be faster due to less parasitic loss.