Sc vs. tc continued....,
06-13-2012, 10:16 PM
#51
Senior Member
TC uses Direct Injection. It's more efficient and is the way most carmakers are going.
A few other random production SC'd cars include mercedes kompressor 190ish hp and the Mini cooper S 170hp? Surprisingly low numbers. Also take examples Pontiac Vibe SC kit 175hp? 2.2 ecotec SC 200hp? (Both cost around $4,000 CAD, same as turbo)
Just seems like the SC's days are over except in certain applications. Small displacement motors love a turbo.
I've owned both SC(210k) and turbo'd ecotecs(75k) and I personally prefer the Turbo.
A few other random production SC'd cars include mercedes kompressor 190ish hp and the Mini cooper S 170hp? Surprisingly low numbers. Also take examples Pontiac Vibe SC kit 175hp? 2.2 ecotec SC 200hp? (Both cost around $4,000 CAD, same as turbo)
Just seems like the SC's days are over except in certain applications. Small displacement motors love a turbo.
I've owned both SC(210k) and turbo'd ecotecs(75k) and I personally prefer the Turbo.
06-13-2012, 10:21 PM
#52
I hate getting involved in these post because they will always be the ******** that wanna talk **** about the SC but some people just enjoy the supercharger more, I love the sound and the rarity of having a supercharged car. U can find turbo cars all the time, they both have there place where they perform best at and so there is a reason both still exist and not just one or the other.
06-13-2012, 10:24 PM
#53
come run my supercharged car any track u want pick your poison. 1/4 mile, road course, auto X, circle track whatever you like. I mean hell i make less power than a fully bolted and tuned tc does. But why is it the 99.8% cant touch my times or trap speed? But again this site is all about "dynos" and peak power
06-13-2012, 10:33 PM
#54
come run my supercharged car any track u want pick your poison. 1/4 mile, road course, auto X, circle track whatever you like. I mean hell i make less power than a fully bolted and tuned tc does. But why is it the 99.8% cant touch my times or trap speed? But again this site is all about "dynos" and peak power
06-13-2012, 10:41 PM
#55
u cant get close 400 out of the stock turbo some have hit 400. And my car will rip the tires at 50+ mph from a roll as well. They cant use traction as an excuse. ive also seen tc's put on slicks and radials still not impressed. stock sc cars typically see around 220whp ok the tc averages 230-240 big deal. one is no better than the other theyre both the same dam cars. it boils down to preference period
i also pull them from a roll as well was just using the track as a comparison
One reason iv found that alot of them bigger turbo tc making 400+ hp cant put the power to the ground without spinning 1st 2nd and 3rd gear, so they have to resort to roll races of 60 or higher to win or wait till they catch grip to catch back up to the car, and that to me is just pointless and stupid.
Last edited by zrated89; 06-13-2012 at 10:41 PM. Reason: Automerged Doublepost
06-13-2012, 11:00 PM
#57
One reason iv found that alot of them bigger turbo tc making 400+ hp cant put the power to the ground without spinning 1st 2nd and 3rd gear, so they have to resort to roll races of 60 or higher to win or wait till they catch grip to catch back up to the car, and that to me is just pointless and stupid.
06-13-2012, 11:05 PM
#59
Senior Member
iTrader: (9)
Join Date: 07-20-09
Location: Platteville, WI
Posts: 5,334
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I upgraded from n/a so boost in general is awesome idc where it comes from.. i think we can all agree on that.. who gives a fawkk where the boost comes from
06-13-2012, 11:14 PM
#61
Senior Member
That's just a newer driver useing the pedal as ON/OFF switch instead of gradually increasing speed. Your being extremly bias here Vander.
Plus most TC owners who have 400hp have roasted off a few sets of tires within 20k much less have stock Conti's on. I've gotten 40k off my stock conti's and my new michelin pilot SS are wearing well so far(10k). Although I can still breakem loose with GMS1 in 2nd IF I want. It's all about throttle control.
Plus most TC owners who have 400hp have roasted off a few sets of tires within 20k much less have stock Conti's on. I've gotten 40k off my stock conti's and my new michelin pilot SS are wearing well so far(10k). Although I can still breakem loose with GMS1 in 2nd IF I want. It's all about throttle control.
06-13-2012, 11:23 PM
#62
That's just a newer driver useing the pedal as ON/OFF switch instead of gradually increasing speed. Your being extremly bias here Vander.
Plus most TC owners who have 400hp have roasted off a few sets of tires within 20k much less have stock Conti's on. I've gotten 40k off my stock conti's and my new michelin pilot SS are wearing well so far(10k). Although I can still breakem loose with GMS1 in 2nd IF I want. It's all about throttle control.
Plus most TC owners who have 400hp have roasted off a few sets of tires within 20k much less have stock Conti's on. I've gotten 40k off my stock conti's and my new michelin pilot SS are wearing well so far(10k). Although I can still breakem loose with GMS1 in 2nd IF I want. It's all about throttle control.
06-14-2012, 12:08 AM
#63
This is false. The additional backpressure created by the turbo puts more force on the piston during the exhaust stroke. This energy taken from the engine is used to power the turbine. It just so happens that there is typically less parasitic loss with a turbo than a supercharger.
As far as which is better, it completely depends on the application. For 1/4 mile runs or a road course with long sweeping turns, the turbo is much better because you can make more peak power and don't need to worry about throttle response.
For a tight track with lots of twisties, it's the supercharger all the way, because you have much better throttle response. The turbo requires that you hit the gas prematurely to corner exit, so that the power is there when you need it. If you are rapidly changing direction, such as in an autocross course, you can do several modulations of the throttle with a sc'ed car in the time that it takes the turbo car to respond to a single throttle input.
It's all about the application. However for each application, one can clearly be defined as better than the other. The reason why turbos are so popular among tuners is because most people think straight line acceleration defines 100% of a vehicle's performance charactersitics, and they have no idea how to drive.
As far as which is better, it completely depends on the application. For 1/4 mile runs or a road course with long sweeping turns, the turbo is much better because you can make more peak power and don't need to worry about throttle response.
For a tight track with lots of twisties, it's the supercharger all the way, because you have much better throttle response. The turbo requires that you hit the gas prematurely to corner exit, so that the power is there when you need it. If you are rapidly changing direction, such as in an autocross course, you can do several modulations of the throttle with a sc'ed car in the time that it takes the turbo car to respond to a single throttle input.
It's all about the application. However for each application, one can clearly be defined as better than the other. The reason why turbos are so popular among tuners is because most people think straight line acceleration defines 100% of a vehicle's performance charactersitics, and they have no idea how to drive.
With a good turbo that is correct size for the motor it will pull just as fast as a SC. My car is always in its powerband above 2500rpms and you wouldn't be that low in the rpm in any road race/autoX.
come run my supercharged car any track u want pick your poison. 1/4 mile, road course, auto X, circle track whatever you like. I mean hell i make less power than a fully bolted and tuned tc does. But why is it the 99.8% cant touch my times or trap speed? But again this site is all about "dynos" and peak power
u cant get close 400 out of the stock turbo some have hit 400. And my car will rip the tires at 50+ mph from a roll as well. They cant use traction as an excuse. ive also seen tc's put on slicks and radials still not impressed. stock sc cars typically see around 220whp ok the tc averages 230-240 big deal. one is no better than the other theyre both the same dam cars. it boils down to preference period
Last time i checked you can't get 370whp 400+tq out of a stock blower cobalt.
The TC cobalt IS better than the SC and you must be smoking crack if you think it isn't
It has better suspension, more power, faster 1/4 mile time, faster road course time, more durable parts, ect.. I don't even know how this is a argument?
06-14-2012, 01:11 AM
#65
loooove the sound of the SC cobalts, but like the seats, brakes and rims on the T/C, and i like making more power with just a tune. id like to drive a sc for a while to see what the instant power feels like with no turbo lag though.
i like them both
i like them both
06-14-2012, 01:18 AM
#66
With a good turbo that is correct size for the motor it will pull just as fast as a SC. My car is always in its powerband above 2500rpms and you wouldn't be that low in the rpm in any road race/autoX.
Cmiller ran faster than you on the stock turbo so it has nothing to do with your SC.
Last time i checked you can't get 370whp 400+tq out of a stock blower cobalt.
The TC cobalt IS better than the SC and you must be smoking crack if you think it isn't It has better suspension, more power, faster 1/4 mile time, faster road course time, more durable parts, ect.. I don't even know how this is a argument?
Cmiller ran faster than you on the stock turbo so it has nothing to do with your SC.
Last time i checked you can't get 370whp 400+tq out of a stock blower cobalt.
The TC cobalt IS better than the SC and you must be smoking crack if you think it isn't
It has better suspension, more power, faster 1/4 mile time, faster road course time, more durable parts, ect.. I don't even know how this is a argument?thats why i said 99.8% he was the exception. And he ran a half of a tenth quicker ET i trapped higher than he did.
06-14-2012, 01:36 AM
#67
Senior Member
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: 07-30-11
Location: Midwest
Posts: 2,826
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
While I don't like superchargers I think it's important to say that if it weren't for the SC Cobalt we more than likely would not have the TC.
I think stock vs. stock, same driver, the TC will out perform the SC in any contest plain and simple. I think that alone, statistically, makes the TC model the "better" car. HOWEVER, preference makes up most real world decisions so in that respect they are the same or equal vehicles.
I think stock vs. stock, same driver, the TC will out perform the SC in any contest plain and simple. I think that alone, statistically, makes the TC model the "better" car. HOWEVER, preference makes up most real world decisions so in that respect they are the same or equal vehicles.
06-14-2012, 02:05 AM
#70
I'm not getting any info as to why one form of forced induction is better than another in this thread.
Will someone please explain what the main physical limitations are of a centrifugal, roots, screw: positive displacement blower are on our engine? Please do not say parasitic loss, yes yes we know it does that. But there is so much more, please do tell... I wanna know... WE.... WANNA KNOW...
Now turbo boys and girls, lets hear the same thing about turbos on our application... "It doesn't take hp you might say..." My response to that... lulz, would you like a samwich?
I''m new here and would love to know, please tell...
Want some extra credit? Throw some tuning terminology into the mix... wrong/right... it doesn't matter, don't worry someone on here knows more than you and will correct you. We are all engineers here on CSS.
Wanna go a step further? How bout using these forced induction applications with water injection and/or nitrous?
WE WANNA KNOW!!!
Will someone please explain what the main physical limitations are of a centrifugal, roots, screw: positive displacement blower are on our engine? Please do not say parasitic loss, yes yes we know it does that. But there is so much more, please do tell... I wanna know... WE.... WANNA KNOW...
Now turbo boys and girls, lets hear the same thing about turbos on our application... "It doesn't take hp you might say..." My response to that... lulz, would you like a samwich?
I''m new here and would love to know, please tell...
Want some extra credit? Throw some tuning terminology into the mix... wrong/right... it doesn't matter, don't worry someone on here knows more than you and will correct you. We are all engineers here on CSS.
Wanna go a step further? How bout using these forced induction applications with water injection and/or nitrous?
WE WANNA KNOW!!!
06-14-2012, 04:22 AM
#71
I dont think u get his point, he has proven that the sc is not a bad platform to build from, he has the skill to drive his car to the max to be honest i think all this sc hate from the turbo guys steems from the fact that half of them cant drive worth a **** so they just went with the high hp possible and roll race at 80. Anyone that can drive knows that both cars are great choices.
06-14-2012, 05:57 AM
#72
Senior Member
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: 07-30-11
Location: Midwest
Posts: 2,826
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I dont think u get his point, he has proven that the sc is not a bad platform to build from, he has the skill to drive his car to the max to be honest i think all this sc hate from the turbo guys steems from the fact that half of them cant drive worth a **** so they just went with the high hp possible and roll race at 80. Anyone that can drive knows that both cars are great choices.
I agree both are great choices for the money but lets be honest.... If your desire is to make power and do so easily and fairly cheap then the TC is the better car. That's fact.
06-14-2012, 07:12 AM
#73
I'm not getting any info as to why one form of forced induction is better than another in this thread.
Will someone please explain what the main physical limitations are of a centrifugal, roots, screw: positive displacement blower are on our engine? Please do not say parasitic loss, yes yes we know it does that. But there is so much more, please do tell... I wanna know... WE.... WANNA KNOW...
Now turbo boys and girls, lets hear the same thing about turbos on our application... "It doesn't take hp you might say..." My response to that... lulz, would you like a samwich?
I''m new here and would love to know, please tell...
Want some extra credit? Throw some tuning terminology into the mix... wrong/right... it doesn't matter, don't worry someone on here knows more than you and will correct you. We are all engineers here on CSS.
Wanna go a step further? How bout using these forced induction applications with water injection and/or nitrous?
WE WANNA KNOW!!!
Will someone please explain what the main physical limitations are of a centrifugal, roots, screw: positive displacement blower are on our engine? Please do not say parasitic loss, yes yes we know it does that. But there is so much more, please do tell... I wanna know... WE.... WANNA KNOW...
Now turbo boys and girls, lets hear the same thing about turbos on our application... "It doesn't take hp you might say..." My response to that... lulz, would you like a samwich?
I''m new here and would love to know, please tell...
Want some extra credit? Throw some tuning terminology into the mix... wrong/right... it doesn't matter, don't worry someone on here knows more than you and will correct you. We are all engineers here on CSS.
Wanna go a step further? How bout using these forced induction applications with water injection and/or nitrous?
WE WANNA KNOW!!!
For real though, haha.
It's a hell of a lot easier to control a car that makes less torque and at a slower rate. The turbo on the TC comes on so hard it can be challenging to control at first.
I agree both are great choices for the money but lets be honest.... If your desire is to make power and do so easily and fairly cheap then the TC is the better car. That's fact.
I agree both are great choices for the money but lets be honest.... If your desire is to make power and do so easily and fairly cheap then the TC is the better car. That's fact.
On a side note, there is nothing wrong with some friendly competition within our community (that's how we grow & learn), but some of the members on here can get down right nasty interms of which form of forced induction is best.
Half of those members don't even know enough about forced induction in general to go throw out those kinds of opinions.
Last edited by Staged07SS; 06-14-2012 at 07:20 AM.
06-14-2012, 07:33 AM
#74
this debates going to come to an end in the near future as electric superchargers become a reality. the problem to date has been that the electric motors that would power them have been big and heavy. automakers are now realizing that they dont need a electric motor that can spin a 70 horse supercharger for three hours they need one that can spin it for 15 seconds. so what you need is a fairly large capacitor and a lightweight short duration high output electric motor attached to a centrifical supercharger. turbos and belt driven superchargers are dinosaurs. which powers the biggest motors on earth? turbos. what powers the quickest vehicles on earth? superchargers. for cars the driving experience of a supercharger is general more enjoyable. my tvs car has no noticable whine and has a huge immediate power band. i let my coworker with a 300 whp STI drive my cobalt and his response after bombing around town was holy ****, i need to get a SC cobalt.
06-14-2012, 07:39 AM
#75
lol. Lets change the topic. Why does Honda suck or why doesnt it?
My reasons why Honda sucks
1.) Never made a sporty car with forced induction.. I dont understand why they wouldnt!!>!> The amount of fan bois out there dying to get there hands on a civic with a turbo is insane. They would make alot of money if they did that. I think the reason is they enjoy selling a car in the mid to low 20k$ region and making a huge profit while just carrying the same engine over year after year, lol.
My reasons why Honda sucks
1.) Never made a sporty car with forced induction.. I dont understand why they wouldnt!!>!> The amount of fan bois out there dying to get there hands on a civic with a turbo is insane. They would make alot of money if they did that. I think the reason is they enjoy selling a car in the mid to low 20k$ region and making a huge profit while just carrying the same engine over year after year, lol.