Turbocharger or Supercharger, Which would be better?

 

I heard turbocharger is better because it has higher potential. But don't ask me to explain it cause I really don't know how to.

 

turbochager cus its not a parasitic drag...they utilize exhaust fumes to power its blades...down side....you have lag.....on the SC you have the parasitic drag...(engine power being used to first turn the sc) good thing about this is once its turning...its starts boosting....only way to up the boost on a sc is to get a smaller pully....(pain in the ass to change out as to a turbo its simple an adjustment on the wastegate....

 

not to mention sc is easiest to maintain.....the turbo is very high maintaince.....since it uses engine oil to cool its self down and needs a turbo timer and a BOV to protect its internals....

 

supercharger is much less pain, and you get a smoother power band, unlike a turbo, but then you don't have the turbo rush, which is just like VTEC kicking in, just 10 times better

turbo is better for performance while supercharger is a more practical way to boost up hp while still being easy to live with

 

Turbo. Doesn't strain your engine as much and higher hp/tq gains can be realized. Higher upper end power, but virtually useless on straight off the line acceleration until upper speeds. The supercharger works the engine more, has less hp/tq gains but has no turbo-lag but loses upper-end power.

 

...also superchargers have a parabolic power not reaching full power 'till higher RPM's, while turbocharger power comes full on early; no need to rev the engine out to get full power.

 

I think you have the two crossed buddy...it's the other way around. Also worth mentioning is that turbos are not as effective on an automatic as opposed to a supercharger.

 

Well, I was part wrong; the supercharger isn't a parabolic curve, rather it is more of a half-parabola... e.g. at low RPM's the supercharger will be spinning slower, and at high RPM's the supercharger will be spinning quicker, therefore more power. Turbochargers are driven by the engine exhaust via a turbine, e.g. pressure not RPM. I know this from a Mustang project I was part of; full power from the supercharger came on around 5500 RPM, while full power from the turbocharger came on around 3000 RPM.

 

Every one got a good point... just an additional point to Asiankidd.... adjust Turbo boosts is easier done on Jap than Euro... Euro models with Turbo(S4, for example)tend to be more electronic-oriented, meaning you have to touch the ECU in order to get more boost out of it, while Jap cars seem to be able to get done by tweaking the car mechanically.....well, most of them anyway... :p

But in short...

Turbocharged

Pros: More effecient giving extra HP, explosive, push-into-seat feel.

Cons: Turbo Lag, high maintainance

Supercharged

Pros: Smoother power delivery/boost

Cons: Not as effecient as Turbo... takes engine power to get addition power.

IMO, they are design to suit 2 different style of driving.... Turbo seems to be more for high speed, high reving engines, while Supercharge give you much better low rev responese/boosts...

Andy Kuo

 

I couldn't agree more. If you look at road racing, the only major circuit to use either is CART - which uses a turbo. They don't car about off-the-line acceleration, but rather acceleration at speed - so the turbo lag is irrelevant.

The only major racing organization that uses superchargers is NHRA (drag racing). Turbo lag is something a 1/4 mile racer doesn't want.

 

Depends on what type of blower you're talking about. Positive displacement or a centrifugal like I have.

I chose the s/c over turbo because they are more well established in my application...neither is "better", IMO, they each have strong pointa and weak points depending on application (power at specific boost, cost, installation difficulty, fabrication needed?, etc, etc.)


1998 Cobra - some mods

 

Actually I agree with Pull_T. It comes down to what you need or want.