2nd Gen Ram Tech 1994-2001 Rams: This section is for TECHNICAL discussions only, that involve the 1994 through 2001 Rams. For any non-tech discussions, please direct your attention to the "General discussion/NON-tech" sub sections.

Turbo or Supercharged? 96 ram 5.2

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old Jan 29, 2010 | 02:32 AM
  #21  
BlueBeast2's Avatar
BlueBeast2
Champion
20 Year Member
Photogenic
Photoriffic
Shutterbug
Joined: Jul 2005
Posts: 2,966
Likes: 3
From: Greeneville, TN
Default

silver06 could you send me pics of your mustangs? You can't mention them around me and not show them off



I say turbo. Unless its a blower on a termi, I hate the sound of 99% of sc's.

Thinking maybe having my stang engine built to handle a turbo if I get the bug for more power
 
Reply
Old Jan 29, 2010 | 02:46 AM
  #22  
011500Ram's Avatar
011500Ram
Banned
Joined: Oct 2009
Posts: 536
Likes: 0
From: Death to the CSA!
Default

Better question. Who thinks the OP is going to actually go through this, and isn't just bored posting on DF?
 
Reply
Old Jan 29, 2010 | 02:52 AM
  #23  
wake's Avatar
wake
Captain
Joined: Jan 2010
Posts: 540
Likes: 0
From: dekalb IL
Default

Originally Posted by 011500Ram
Better question. Who thinks the OP is going to actually go through this, and isn't just bored posting on DF?
maybe, either way it still makes for good discussion if anyone on DF was considering boosting a 5.2 i know theres a few on here that have boosted 318's ive seen at least two IIRC
 
Reply
Old Jan 29, 2010 | 04:55 AM
  #24  
bartz32tt's Avatar
bartz32tt
Registered User
Joined: Oct 2009
Posts: 21
Likes: 0
From: Iowa
Default

+1 vote for turbo (and not just cuz my car is twin turbo)

A supercharger reaches max efficiency at redline, since it's belt driven. Turbos certainly don't reach max efficiency at redline and therefore are NOT "super laggy" when you use the right turbo on the right application. That also means they're not used for high rpm vehicles. Open up the exhaust for less lag and a 2.5-3k rpm full-spool is achievable. Especially since the OP said he would want to go twin turbo..even less lag.

Also, superchargers are limited to a (relatively low) boost psi determined by the pulley size. Turbos are much more versatile in that respect; thus easier to tweak for more power should you decide you need more down the road.

I'm tired of the whole domestic vs "ricers" talk, just ignorance. Look at the DODGE stealth rt...sure, it had a mitsu motor in it, but it's still a DODGE. Oh yea, and it was twin turbo...did I mention it has a "ricer" motor, and a fast one at that??
 
Reply
Old Jan 29, 2010 | 08:27 AM
  #25  
silver06cummins's Avatar
silver06cummins
Professional
Joined: Oct 2007
Posts: 110
Likes: 0
From: Knoxville Tn
Default

Originally Posted by BlueBeast2
silver06 could you send me pics of your mustangs? You can't mention them around me and not show them off



I say turbo. Unless its a blower on a termi, I hate the sound of 99% of sc's.

Thinking maybe having my stang engine built to handle a turbo if I get the bug for more power
my computer actually crashed 2 days ago,I went in and cteated a new admin account instead of fixin the broke sectors in it and guess where my pics are??? yep on the broke side of the computer lol, I have a few I can scan and send out...want me to post them here or mail them to you?

Brad
 
Reply
Old Jan 29, 2010 | 10:02 AM
  #26  
rumble_truck's Avatar
rumble_truck
Veteran
Joined: Jul 2009
Posts: 348
Likes: 0
From: St. Petersburg FL
Default

Originally Posted by bartz32tt
+1 vote for turbo (and not just cuz my car is twin turbo)

A supercharger reaches max efficiency at redline, since it's belt driven. Turbos certainly don't reach max efficiency at redline and therefore are NOT "super laggy" when you use the right turbo on the right application. That also means they're not used for high rpm vehicles. Open up the exhaust for less lag and a 2.5-3k rpm full-spool is achievable. Especially since the OP said he would want to go twin turbo..even less lag.

Also, superchargers are limited to a (relatively low) boost psi determined by the pulley size. Turbos are much more versatile in that respect; thus easier to tweak for more power should you decide you need more down the road.

I'm tired of the whole domestic vs "ricers" talk, just ignorance. Look at the DODGE stealth rt...sure, it had a mitsu motor in it, but it's still a DODGE. Oh yea, and it was twin turbo...did I mention it has a "ricer" motor, and a fast one at that??

I'm not sure on how much boost a turbo gives out, but my buddy had a thunderbird s/c and had like a 5% underdrive pulley and was pushin about 21lbs of boost at redline.

And calling a stealth "fast"... shame on you...
 
Reply
Old Jan 29, 2010 | 10:39 AM
  #27  
Gav1n8's Avatar
Gav1n8
Veteran
Joined: Aug 2008
Posts: 310
Likes: 0
From: Alma, AR
Default

silver06cummins just post them here as I want to see them too.

I say supercharger...
 
Reply
Old Jan 29, 2010 | 12:22 PM
  #28  
011500Ram's Avatar
011500Ram
Banned
Joined: Oct 2009
Posts: 536
Likes: 0
From: Death to the CSA!
Default

Originally Posted by bartz32tt

I'm tired of the whole domestic vs "ricers" talk, just ignorance. Look at the DODGE stealth rt...sure, it had a mitsu motor in it, but it's still a DODGE. Oh yea, and it was twin turbo...did I mention it has a "ricer" motor, and a fast one at that??
The Dodge Stealth is a Japanese car. It had a Mitsubishi engine, as well as a Mitsubishi everything else. It was just rebranded. Just like the Holden Monaro/ Pontiac GTO.
 
Reply
Old Jan 29, 2010 | 01:58 PM
  #29  
bartz32tt's Avatar
bartz32tt
Registered User
Joined: Oct 2009
Posts: 21
Likes: 0
From: Iowa
Default

Originally Posted by 011500Ram
The Dodge Stealth is a Japanese car. It had a Mitsubishi engine, as well as a Mitsubishi everything else. It was just rebranded. Just like the Holden Monaro/ Pontiac GTO.
Yes, I mentioned that already. But my point was that it still carried the dodge name and some people are so stuck on negatively viewing imports that they glance right over cars like the laser or stealth.

As for a stealth being fast...that's a whole new debate on what you consider fast. I realize there are plenty of much faster cars on the market, but I'm sorry, I consider 315lb-ft of all wheel tq at 2.5k rpm and a top speed of 160 "fast".
 
Reply
Old Jan 31, 2010 | 01:38 AM
  #30  
Chaddd07's Avatar
Chaddd07
Thread Starter
|
Registered User
Joined: Oct 2007
Posts: 34
Likes: 0
From: Rowlett, TX
Default

Thanks for your help everyone! My budget right now is $10,000...$5,000 after engine and tranny replaced...willing to throw in $2,000 more for engine prep (hope thats enough)

Decided to go with supercharger (emailed a guy at procharger and read all the posts!)

So now is the question I missed...what all do I need to do to prep the engine and the tranny to withstand the extra power?

Thanks in advance,

Chad

(Will try to post a current pic of the truck)
 
Reply



All times are GMT -4. The time now is 06:33 PM.