i still prefer supercharger over turbo, so what makes twin turbo different, except a little more power.

 

welll, i am using my car because no one makes anything for it. Im sure that on a car that is stock turbocharged, of course you could do alot more for less than 9800 bucks. Im sure that you have some idea of how much of a pain in the **** it is to find performance parts. the 9800 bucks was from Ripp Mods, and it costs so much because their blower is patented, and they have the market cornered, so they can screw everyone who wants to go fast in a stratus.

just a quick break down...and these have come down a bit:
supercharger stage one complete kit- 3849.95
headers 1199.95
ripp bov 249.95
boost cooler 499.95
al crank pulley 274.99
gasket kit 300
mount kit 300
LSD 1199.95
i cant find the ECU, but im sure that its not cheap.

so about 7800 for the stuff i listed there. and like i said, these have dropped since i looked last time...i know that the front mount alone has dropped some 20 bucks

the guy with the RT TT kit had to have Everything custom made, so im sure that the one off parts have to be ridiculously priced. the list that he has is putting him right around the same price actually, i just found his profile on 2g. and his is all rigged to work, whereas Ripp supposedly offers excellent tech support from what ive been told. i dont know if youve seen under the hood of an RT stratus, but space is limited, so he ahd to run the piping all over creation to make it work.

this car is all over the internet, from ebay ads to andys auto sport:

is a member of 2g and is sponsered, from what i gather, by meguiars...he has an AFI single turbo kit and he paid 4800 just for the turbo setup, which i am guessing includes the IC because i dont see it on his list.

i just dont see the luster behind turbocharging a factory NA car...a friend of mine is building a 1st gen sebring coupe, 2 liter 5 speed car....he bought a reman bottom end, JE pistons...eagle rods...quaife...20g turbo...custom IC...everything...and he ill have about 12 grand in it, and if he can sniff the mirada, ill be amazed...

the only people who i ever see that really talk up turbo, are people who own them...you say that we need to compare a car which has complete kits available in both TC and SC, which i agree with 100%...so name a vehicle. something NA stock that has both offered. and we will take into effect the bare minimum requried to make that type of FI work. all a SC needs is a belt, the unit, and some piping, bare minimum.

 

it goes to sometimes more of a practicality stand point.

it is easier to mount a blower on a V style engine than it is on an inline engine. and on the same token it is easier to mount a turbo on an inline engine as opposed to a V style engine. it is the simple fact of pipeing that goes into adding in a turbo. less plumbing always makes for an easier install.

which one is better. . .that soley depends on your application. if your looking at something that rev's for a few days. . .turbo. if your going for brute force, blower.

however, there is something that does make a turbo ineffective. if you spin the compressor wheel up too fast it will become ineffective and one will loose boost pressure. I am unsure of blowers. I imagine there is a point where they become ineffective

 

by ineffective, do you mean that there is a point where no matter how much faster the turbine spins, it wont create more pressure?

 

That's it. Just like superchargers are onlt as good as their pulley ratio, turbos are only as good as their size will allow boost. As I have already mentioned supercharges are best at the low end and fall flat up top, where turbos are slow in starting on the bottom end and they are great on the top end. Superchargers provide more N/A like power that comes on smooth and linear, while turbochargers start off slow then give you a sudden kick in the pants that pulls it through redline more like nitrous but without the limited use.

I have found several cars that have both types of forced induction available to them, but they tend to be very off balance when it comes to pricing depending on the specific car. The Viper is a perfect example, both are made for it, but it only has twin turbos for it and that makes it far more costly than a single turbo set up. Superchargers are also only as good as the engine they're bolted to, a weak low hp N/A engine will make a weak low hp supercharged engine.

Turbos make power very easily and the smaller the turbo the greater the responsiveness, this is why the SRT-4 is so nice, but it also lowers the maximum power potential. The larger the turbo the greater the power potential, but the less responsive they are. If turbos were so inferior to superchargers, then why are most all Hennessy and Lingenfelters cars turboed?

These still have nothing to do with the main question of which makes the most power and I have answered it 100% correctly twice, even more so since it is refering to supercharging vs. twin turbocharging.

 

thats fine that lingenfelter and hennesseys cars are turboed...but in real world experience, which lingenfelter and hennessey certainly are not, as i have enver seen one of either, aside from the hennessey display at the nationals...on the other hand, at my home track, there are 2 C4 vettes, one running in the high 9s, trailered in, and the other is running mid 10s, driven in, both blown..its a very compact unit and im not sure who makes it, but it just seems like the arguement of supercharger vs turbocharge more depends on what youre starting with, not with what you want to end up with. for something like a neon or the shelby daytona, it would make more sense to turbocharge it, but with something like my mirada, or a mustang, which has some stock *****, the blower makes more sense.

 

That is very true and is basically what drew said which I totally agree with. The application does make a difference, to price, practicality and end result. It is far easier to supercharge a V8 than to turbocharge it, just as turbocharging a 4 cylinder is easier than supercharging. To a point, turbocharging yeilds more power than supercharging in any and all application, but there is a limit to turbochargers useability which is why the best and the fastest use superchargers. This is why I have been making it clear that there are two sides to the question asked and the answer is different for each side.

There has been plenty of good valid points brought up, but none of which has any effect on the answer to the question. Twin turbocharging makes more power in almost every application for a realistic build up, it gives the most streetable power. Technically though, supercharging can go far beyond turbocharging in power production, but only in a full on non-streetable drag car to the point of making 4-5 times more power than turbocharging.

If I were building a 4 or 6 cylinder with forced induction it would be turbocharged, but if I were building a V8 I would supercharge it. This is just my personal preference as to which way I would go with each type of engine. I love the look of the nice big supercharger on top of the V8, so I wouldn't be using the type that bolts on under the hood and looks like an alternator and a turbo had a child. This doesn't change the fact that twin turbocharging the V8 would make more streetable power than supercharging it, but to me nothing looks better than a blown V8, especially a Hemi. And I had to bring that up just so I could once again post this picture of the most beautiful engine I've ever seen, the polished all aluminum Supercharged 540 Hemi:


[IMG]local://upfiles/193/6F936C7185ED4DEBA96BCBDFCEB39D41.jpg[/IMG]

 

that engine is obscene....

however, i do find a great deal of humor, and truth, in your piece about the under hood supercharger looking like the spawn of an alternator and a turbocharger...

but im sure that mitch woudl agree, avenger39, if youre looking to build up your car, turbo is the way to go.

 

Yep, if he's looking to build the Avenger then turbos the best way to go. But if someones building a V8, there's nothing better than the look and shear intimidation factor of the blower exploding mountain high through the hood, plus it will be close enough to a twin turbos power output that you wouldn't get beat by much if you every ran across one. I've seen far more blown V8's then I have twin turboed V8's, so the chances of running one on the street is gonna be really rare.

On a related note for some laughs about factory turbocharged V8's (the only factory turbocharged V8 that I can think of or even know of),
In '80 and '81 the Trans Ams had a turbocharged V8, a 301 I believe it was, but like all the other cars back then it was heavily neutered and only had a single turbo on it giving it only 210 HP, which was more than the 403 Olds 6.6 Litre with it's 185 HP and not as good as the 400 Pontiac T/A 6.6 with it's 220 HP. This turbo T/A was only good for 0-60 MPH in 8.2 sec. and the 1/4 mile in 16.7 @ 86 MPH and it tops out at a K car like 116 MPH top speed.[sm=icon_rofl.gif] It would have been something had they bumped them up from the 7.5:1 compression ratio to most turbo engines 8.1:1 ratio and twin turboed it.

On an unrelated, yet slightly related and even more laughable part,
I only know alot about the T/A's because a friend of mine had bought a '79 T/A with the 403 Olds and it was loaded with everything (T-tops, power everything, A/C, auto, black w/gold pinstripping), so I looked into them. It is one of the best looking cars, but it couldn't even barely break the tires loose and they were bald, it was so pathetically sad how he would try over and over and still couldn't get even the slightest chirp out of them.[sm=icon_rofl.gif][sm=laughat.gif][sm=loser.gif] In fact, it was so so sad that the ONLY time it EVER broke traction was doing a donut in dirt/gravel and on snow and ice.[sm=roll.gif] The even sadder factor was how it sat broken down more often than it ran and he never listened to me on what to do with it or what was wrong with it. I told him over and over to get new plug wires or he could suffer an engine fire. He never listened until he had the first plug wire engine fire and he still only replaced the one wire, even though he had the new set. I was in it for the second plug wire fire in which he used the trunk carpet to put it out and then replaced just that one wire, it was cold and snowing at the time. He eventually replaced the others before any more fires. I also told him what was wrong when the engine wouldn't start, but he wouldn't listen to me and listened to others instead. I told him that everything was working and that the engine was locked up, but he listened to everyone else and replaced the battery and the starter (he replaced the starter a few times thinking they were bad new starters) and then even the wiring from the battery to the starter. He finally did get it checked out and suprise, the engine was locked up due to a broken cam or crank, I forget which since it was over 13 years ago. Man what a good looking total POS that thing was.[sm=exactly.gif]

 

wait...at quaker city last year, some guy had an aniiversary edition "TURBO" ta...and he told me that he doesnt rae it because its too valuable, and he said that it was like a factory 12 second car!