from what i've seen the lsj is a much more reliable motor than the lnf. minus that the tc isn't much better minus all the other stuff the lsj woulda got in 08 if they didn't have to switch to lnf

but anywho i'm an enthusiast first, a racer 2nd and a mechanic/tuner 3rd so what do i know. i, like most, bought the lsj for the rarity/sound/instant power/easy mods so suck it

 

In the end we should all get rid of turbos or superchargers and use this. Someone else already pointed this out so I can't take credit but just watch.

Electric Supercharger Power Intake System - YouTube

 

Heres my breakdown..

Turbo

How it works - Bolted to the exhaust manifold of the engine. Exhaust gasses leave the engine and spin the turbine inside the turbo. The turbine is connected to a compressor which compresses air into the cylinders of the engine. The more exhaust that comes out, the faster the turbine spins, the more compressed air is forced.

Turbo lag?? Yes, it is there. Smaller turbos provide boost quickly at lower engine speeds. Yet they do not make as much power as a larger turbo. Larger turbos take longer to boost, but in turn the make more. There are multiple ways to lessen the effects of turbo lag. 1. WasteGate - This is a valve that lets exhaust bypass the turbine. Using different bearings and using lighter turbine blades also lessen the effect of turbo lag. Modern turbos have little lag now, yet it still will in lower rpms.

pros.

It is more economical. No denying. The reason being is because it's energy is created by exhaust gases that would other wise just have been wasted. Though it is more efficient, let's not ignore the fact that it does cause exhaust back pressure and disrupts exhaust flow out the engine. Also a turbo can produce more PEAK power than a supercharger.

Cons.
Well, turbo lag. More likely to damage an engine because of the sudden surge of power it creates. Also, it can make the car more likely to lose traction suddenly or be unpredictable.
Typically, turbos also get extremely hot and always need an intercooler. Also, turbos are more complicated with installing and with how they are. More parts, more things to go wrong. Turbos or generally less reliable than a supercharger. The reason being is because of the extreme rpms the turbine can spin to, the power they make, the surge of power that could damage internals of the engine, the heat they cause. Also, tuning a turbocharger is typically ay harder than a supercharger to tune for.

 

13 mph over stock is quit a gain your argument is invalid

 

What easy mods? You guys can't hit 300whp with every bolt-on known to man. I could load a tune and fart 300whp I understand you guys own them and have to defend it, but like i said last night this shouldn't be a argument.

I hate all cobalts so i have no reason to make **** up

 

Zrated has a TVS so he should be traping that high.

 

Superchargers.

"How they work? It is an air compressor that uses engine crank power to spin a turbine or screws. This forces air into the engine. That's basically it. They make several versions of superchargers, screw, roots, and centrifugal.

Roots - Basically, this is just meshed lobe rotors that rotate in opposite directions. They trap air into pockets and force them into a chamber. It is compressed, and sent into the engine. These are good for low rpm applications and are very reliable and simple.

Screw. - This one counter rotates 2 screws instead of rotors. These ones move more air and compress it easier. They do not make any power in low rpms like a roots version. They make all their power in the higher rpms.

Centrifugal - Tadaa! this ones like a turbo! They pull air in, they force it into a smaller area, that compresses the air and it goes into the engine. They have low moving parts, and they are extremely reliable. They move a ton of air and they make less heat than most superchargers. They also are the most efficient superchargers. They also do not make their power in lower rpms. All high rpms for this guy.

Pros.
No lag, instant power. As in, floor it and tadaa! yay! You get the power when you floor it. That means a more linear power. That means, its predictable and easy to use. Superchargers do not generate as much heat as a turbo. Intercoolers may not be necessary based upon boost levels. Roots superchargers like the cobalt need one though. Based upon person, superchargers make a cool ass noise. Yea boiiii! Superchargers are also more reliable. They have less moving parts, don't generally boost as much. Also, they are easier to tune for. Superchargers are also easier to install.

Cons. They usually do not make as much peak power. Simple fact. Please note I say peak power... Supercharged cars do make more noise generally. Supercharged cars are not as efficient as turbos. This being because they will always have a parasitic loss. Some superchargers though, just like how some turbos beat their lag, can beat this loss and consider the loss negligible.

 

fully bolted, ported head, ported m62, 2.7" pulley, 80's, e85, aggresive tune should be pretty close to 300. anyways i was cracking up this lol pretty good point

 

You can bolt on a turbo and fart 300

 

true statement

 

Basically, it all depends on what you use it for... When I say peak power, I mean at the very PEAK of the power curve in a car. A power curve for a turbo is generally going to look kinda like a upwards curve. A power curve for a supercharger will look like a straight damn line. This being said, a supercharged car with the same hp as a turbo car will make more hp and certain rpms and certain points. This makes superchargers ideal for road courses such as those you see on city races in Gran Turisimo games.

But, if we are only speaking of Turbo cobalt vs supercharged cobalt, the turbo makes more peak power all day, hands down. Does that make it insanely way better? not necessarily. The turbo cobalt I raced was actually extremely close where the turbo only pulled towards the 90mph mark.. It would be extremely silly of us to point to the turbo as the ONLY cause for the more power of the TC cobalt. The TC also has newer age DI and newer age engine advancements. It also has NLS. Also it carries traction controls. Also, the supercharger in the SC cobalt just isn't that impressive. Sure you can make it fast, but it's a small little guy.

by the way, I own the supercharged cobalt, and I am glad I bought it. I got it for 7grand less then a turbo one and I have less miles. Am I saying SC cobalts are better? No. The TC is the upgrade. But having ridden in a turbo stock cobalt, I am not that impressed with it. The seats are hella more comfortable, and it does handle better, but for me being 20, the SC cobalt is just fine. And I love the scream of the engine.

 

i said easy mods not necessarily easy power. but it takes less than an hour to take off the blower if i wanted to swap pullies and if it wasn't blocked by the damn frame u could swap pullys in 5 mins lol

what i was getting at though was these lnfs are always having wierd whacky issues i don't see so much with the lsj. but thats an engine thing i guess not necessarily pertaining to the aspiration.

still... 8000hp nhra cars are s/c'd

 

06 ION Redline vs 09 Cobalt SS/TC - YouTube

 

Excuse me?

https://www.cobaltss.net/forums/dyno...ighest-222466/

 

dam thats pretty close to what i said.

 

 

You consider these all easy mods? Compared to a tune only on TC? Impressive dyno numbers but it is quite a bit of work done to the original car.

 

koennigsegg ccx is twin supercharged and a very ******* fast car

 

You take the blower off to swap pullies? Hmm I have never done that with m62, tvs or twinscrew lol. theres nothing in the way on mine.

 

I never said it was easy. Your the one who said it was not possible.

Both power adders have their benefits.

But its not fair to compare roots blower technology from the early 2000s to Twin Scroll Turbo Technology from 2006. That would be like comparing TVS 1320 supercharger to the B207R turbo used on the Saab 9-3 turbo.

The TVS 1320 is capable of so much more power. BFD! It does not prove anything...

 

I love watching the SC guys compare a stock turbo car to a TVS car. Throw a big turbo on there and compare again.

 

I stated 300whp cause i know what your car made and is pretty much maxed out with the m62. I'm not knocking anyone's cars and sometimes people don't have the money to spend on a complete turbo kit so they buy one part at a time. It's your car and you build it the way you want it with the funds you have to work with. I waited till i had funds to do everything at once and drove my car stock for a year and half while i researched everything.

We all drive cobalts and if you have enough money they can all be fast.

 

Yeah. I agree. I respect and love the sound of a nice loouuud turbo just as much as a SC sound. That hiss is something serious!

I can't stand BOVs. stupid loud sneezes that are easy to replicate with a cheap electric thingy for $50.

but a nice loud turbo? I like listening to drifters drifting because you hear that ssssssssSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSS
kowkow PssssssssssssSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSS

Just as good as a SC..

but I don't care to buy the type of turbo system that would create that sound, and it's not worth buying a TC. I can respect turbo cars tho. That's what people need. You can ike what you want to like, but respect the other guy too. I like turbos (although lsj>lnf IMO) better than supers, but driving a SC is amazing. gotta stop with the bickering, kiddos.

 

Anyone seen the H62. It was a M62 fitted with twisted rotors, wish Chevrolet would have kept them for the street SS's and not just the time attack ones.

 

I forget his username. But there is a member on the board here who got one of GM's high helix rotor H62 from the time attack car and has it on his ss !!