Why is it that TRD only makes superchargers? It's not like Toyota doesn't have any experience with turbos, look at the MR2 and the Supra!

Dont blame TRD Japan, it's more a Toyota Motor Sales, USA/TRD USA issue.

One of the reason why the last Supra died (also the RX-7, etc) was due to high insurance cost. People did not want to pay alot of insurance for turbo power. Now, there' SC and TC rolling around in cars. Insurance Companies are making a boat load of money on SUVs :lol:

So... turbocharged cars cost more to insure than supercharged?

Although both would cost more over NA, i think turbo's cost more to insure. :? You are basicly putting exhuast back in to the powerplant.

they do... they are comming out with one for the XA and XB but unfortunately not the TC...

Although both would cost more over NA, i think turbo's cost more to insure. You are basicly putting exhuast back in to the powerplant.

I seriously don't think this matters... This has to be absolutely NOT the reason why TRD goes with the supercharger...

IMO this country loves torque... Love it low too... A S/C is way better for that matter... Thats the only logical explaination I can think of... This country grew up with blowers on muscle cars... They're just going back to the roots... (no pun intended)

Mods in general, especially on a tC, really appeal to the younger "import tuner" crowd though don't they? Shouldn't TRD be catering to us instead of torque loving 50 yr olds?

Too bad it isn't the 20 year olds that are designing the cars right?

hate to be the needy stupid child.. but what does torque do again.. as opposed to HP... does it give you higher initial accleration?

I know so very little about the actual technical aspect of cars... :?

torque gets you going hp keeps you going

Maybe its because turbos may require a lot more extras u need to add. With a turbo, ur gonna need to also get headers, intake, and maybe injectors. And also, TRD is a reliable company that produces parts for Toyota cars (obviously) and if some kids start putting 20 psi into their boost controllers and blowing their engines, it might decrease their integrity. They are trying to make plug and play parts that are very safe and reliable. And also, a turbo is a lot harder to set up than a sc and requires more tuning.

Although both would cost more over NA, i think turbo's cost more to insure. :? You are basicly putting exhuast back in to the powerplant.

And I know this doesn't matter, but ur not putting exhaust air back into the engine, the exhaust is fed into the turbo which spools the air brought in from the intake and thats what gets put into the engine.

Doesn't TRD stand for Toyota racing Division? I thought TRD is part of toyota and not a seperate company? Bill

Doesn't TRD stand for Toyota racing Division? I thought TRD is part of toyota and not a seperate company? Bill

Yes it does, I mis-phrased it.

thought it was Toyota Racing Development?

thought it was Toyota Racing Development?

Again yes, it does stand for that, a was previously referring to the fact that it is part of Toyota, i didn't pay attention to what he actually said.

Superchargers are more reliable, less prone to breaking, and plus they supply the engine with power all the time - you don't have any lag as you're waiting for the turbo to spool up. The question is, why would you want a turbo over a supercharger?

because of the turbo lag!

i'd rather have a sudden rush of power than a ho-hum delivery of power from zero. and then there's the exhilerating PSS of the blowoff valve that you just can't pass up.

plus superchargers give off this annoying whining noise...

because of the turbo lag!

i'd rather have a sudden rush of power than a ho-hum delivery of power from zero. and then there's the exhilerating PSS of the blowoff valve that you just can't pass up.

plus superchargers give off this annoying whining noise...

:roll:

well most people would say theyd rather have a tubo. With a supercharger, u get a set amount of performance and thats it, all u can do is pulleys. With a turbo, u can set it to like 7 psi for street and then 12 for racing, and if u get upgrades to ur car, u can continue to turn up the psi via your boost controller. For the Tc, i dont think it matters much, but a turbo has more possibilites. The only advantage a Tc would get with a turbo is the availability of a simple boost controller to add a quick 20 horse.

funny thing is you can also put a BOV on a supercharged vehicle. esp a centrifugal force one. www.rippmods.com has one for the 5s-fe used in a few cars (esp. camry)

with the one for the TC you can also put on a BOV. more than likely it has one.

there went that excuse of turbo over supercharger.

Maybe its because turbos may require a lot more extras u need to add. With a turbo, ur gonna need to also get headers, intake, and maybe injectors.

If this was made BY Toyota... Designed to sport a trubo, then all parts mentioned would be stock... There would be no need for "extra" parts since they'll have the proper parts to support the extra air flow...

Even if it was aftermarket... You'll have to do the same thing with a supercharged car... Why wouldn't you need to up the headers, intake, and injectors if you're running a supercharge but you had to with turbo?

And also, TRD is a reliable company that produces parts for Toyota cars (obviously) and if some kids start putting 20 psi into their boost controllers and blowing their engines, it might decrease their integrity. They are trying to make plug and play parts that are very safe and reliable. And also, a turbo is a lot harder to set up than a sc and requires more tuning.

I agree with the stupid kid's part... A lot more Toyota lots would be filled by turbo charged Scions by dumb people trying to put 300 hp into their totally stock tCs... However, the turbo takes a bit more tuning, the supercharger takes a LOT longer to develop... From a manufacture's standpoint, they would be much better off slapping on a turbo then tunning it rather than producing a unique supercharger for a new car...

Superchargers are more reliable, less prone to breaking, and plus they supply the engine with power all the time - you don't have any lag as you're waiting for the turbo to spool up. The question is, why would you want a turbo over a supercharger?

To an idiot the turbo would be less reliable... A supercharger has more parts, period. That in anything engineered would mean it'll break easier... The more parts the more complication and the more chances something will go wrong... A turbo is just a turbine... Under proper tuning, the turbo should run with absolutely no problem at all... You have to replace the pulley in the supercharger and replace the oil... With a turbo it's pretty much power for the rest of the car's life and no upkeep if you tuned it right... A poorly tuned supercharger would be worst than a wrongly tuned turbo... (well they'll both be bad so I guess they're even) The thing is, You can't really tune a supercharger unless you start from scratch... I'm not too big with superchargers so the amount of things you can do with it...

StormX02 wrote:
because of the turbo lag!

i'd rather have a sudden rush of power than a ho-hum delivery of power from zero. and then there's the exhilerating PSS of the blowoff valve that you just can't pass up.

plus superchargers give off this annoying whining noise...

I second the :roll: I'm sick of people who wants a turbo because of the BOV....

well most people would say theyd rather have a tubo. With a supercharger, u get a set amount of performance and thats it, all u can do is pulleys. With a turbo, u can set it to like 7 psi for street and then 12 for racing, and if u get upgrades to ur car, u can continue to turn up the psi via your boost controller. For the Tc, i dont think it matters much, but a turbo has more possibilites. The only advantage a Tc would get with a turbo is the availability of a simple boost controller to add a quick 20 horse.

This is exactly why Toyota might not want to make a turbo tC... Because of people who think this is ok...

very sound observations KAuss. I'm glad to find someone who actually knows more about FI than "The turbo makes a really cool noise"

I just think TRD was trying to devolope something that would appeal to the largest audiance. While there are those of us (like me) that enjoy the power potential of a Turbocharger most people are not looking for potential, just results.

The Supercharger is just giving 40 more horses. It gives a power boost through the entire rpm range. It is also dealer installed with a TRD warrenty. Make it simple, easy, and reliable.

Besides, it means when I throw on my turbo set-up I'll be one of the few that decided to go the less traveled road.

Some more inupt: I was thinking along different lines. I was talking about (when i said a turbo needs more extras) TRD supplying an aftermarket turbo that doesn't come from the factory. If the Tc were to have a turbo stock, then my point wouldn't matter. And as for the boost controller, i don't see any problem with that. Yes, 12 psi. would be pushing it, but agian i was talking about toyota cars in general. But, an increase of 2 psi wouldn't be much of an issue. One of the first things many people do when they get a turbocharged car is put a boost controller in it.

plus superchargers give off this annoying whining noise... And what do you think a Turbo sounds like spooling up? :?:

I personally like the noise of both turbos and superchargers. The reason why i like turbos is b/c when you race someone, and you have lag, they think they are going really fast, and then the turbo kicks in....and pttssss, your way past them. At least thats my experiance with a turbo. But hey, to each his own.

I love the sound of both as well.....I am more of a turbo guy but it just depends the car I would force induct....old muscle car-S/C, import-turbo, just depends

i also like both sc and tc. but if i were to go FI, it will depend on what i want, lots of power or limited power.

[quote]StormX02 wrote:
because of the turbo lag!

i'd rather have a sudden rush of power than a ho-hum delivery of power from zero. and then there's the exhilerating PSS of the blowoff valve that you just can't pass up.

plus superchargers give off this annoying whining noise...

I second the :roll: I'm sick of people who wants a turbo because of the BOV...



Dude that isn't fair, the BoV was but ONE thing that happened to stand out because you throw me in with everyone else.
You're going to persecute me because I mentioned it? is it really so wrong to like something that everyone else just happens to like? Hell I might as well not like Toyota then because everyone and their grandma drives a corolla. :roll:





plus superchargers give off this annoying whining noise... And what do you think a Turbo sounds like spooling up? :?:

It's not the same at all. Have you heard them both in real life?

Well a supercharger is being used because it is better than a turbocharger, you have constant boost pressure, so better off the line.

plus superchargers give off this annoying whining noise... And what do you think a Turbo sounds like spooling up? :?:

It's not the same at all. Have you heard them both in real life? I know they don't sound the same at all, but I was just pointing out that they both make noise...and yes I have heard them both :wink:

Centrifugal supercharger = Turbo without exhaust housing... same thing basically.. same basic design, same means of compressing the intake air charge.. same delivery, different exhaust path then a turbo.. only in the fact that it exits the motor normally, and when i say normally i mean that it exits via an exhaust manifold/header directly into the exhaust system... the means by which the centrifugal supercharger recieves its drive power is via the shaft connecting a pulley at one end to meet the drive belts.. the other end of the shaft is connected to the supercharger housing where on a turbo there would be the exhaust housing, and no shaft connecting the main housing to recieve drive power from the drive belts.. so yes u can still up the boost on a centrifugal supercharger ... it all depends on what the boost output of that supercharger is set to produce.. or the turbines trim characteristics.. if the centrifugal supercharger is capable of producing 15psi but is using only 6 or 7 psi , should be able to have a means of boost control to up the additional psi that is being bled off by the waste gate. Additionally, you also can put on a blow off valve on the system beacause boost is still being built relative to engine speed on this type of system but not because of freewheeling of the turbine and not because like on a turbo exhaust gas of the previous rpm range is still making that exhaust turbine spin, but because when the throttle body closes the engine is still at a certian rpm making the drive belts turn that supercharger relative to that engine speed, but as it drops between shifts suddenly, that boost and engine speed in relation to that throttle bodys position suddenly being closed is not the same, thus boost is built up between the throttle body and the charge coming from the Supercharger. As that boost exceedes the set level within that section of pipe the pressure must be released and thats where the Blow off valve comes in.. PSSSHHHHT!, additionally, if the supercharger is producing max boost due to the size of the pully used to created the ratio between revolutions of engine speed vs. revolution of supercharger speed, a different pulley size can be employed to create a different ratio.. thus making the supercharger turn faster in relation to the engines speed, creating more available boost... so... i guess the real question will be what will the max boost pressure from this TRD Supercharger be capable in stock trim.. are we being limited by the pully size or by a wastegate...thats the real question...

Dude that isn't fair, the BoV was but ONE thing that happened to stand out because you throw me in with everyone else.
You're going to persecute me because I mentioned it? is it really so wrong to like something that everyone else just happens to like? Hell I might as well not like Toyota then because everyone and their grandma drives a corolla.

If you are someone that likes turbo because it goes PSSHH, then include yourself in my hated circle..

If you are not, then ignore the comment...

I don't have to like anyone here and I certianly don't like people that like turbos because they have a BOV :roll:

to me.. the PSSSh of the BOV on turbo is just a plus. i like the power the turbo gives your car.

Toyota doesnt currently use Turbos on smaller engines like 1.5 and 2.4l engines. But they did use them in 2.0L MR2's in the early and mid 90's. The reason is they will eventually mess the engine up on the smaller liter engines. That is what I was told.

Toyota doesnt currently use Turbos on smaller engines like 1.5 and 2.4l engines. But they did use them in 2.0L MR2's in the early and mid 90's. The reason is they will eventually mess the engine up on the smaller liter engines. That is what I was told.

uhh any FI to any engine will mess it up, cuz basicly ur forcing more air in to the engine. its like this you can only drink so much water at one time for someone to force more water will make u choke. i really think car companys like toyota stopped making turbos is that the engine won't last every long and it doesn't really mater what size the engine is.

o fyi supras where turboed too in the mid 90s untill 97.

o fyi supras where turboed too in the mid 90s untill 97.[/quote]


Oh, I didnt know there were 2.0L Surpra's ever. I only new of MR2's with the 2.0L Turbo. Huh. :roll:

Toyota doesnt currently use Turbos on smaller engines like 1.5 and 2.4l engines

2.4L engine is SOOO not small... Also, putting turbos in smaller engines gives the best gains since it would show the most significant boost in the shortest amount of time... Trying to fill a bigger area would mean more PSI and usually with added PSI means slower spool times... Not to mention having a small engine turbo car built to be sold would cost cheaper with comparable performance to large N/A engine cars... To the consumer this is a "value" which IMO all companies should take advantage of...

They already have displacement on demand, now they just need to put a BIT of complication to the simple turbo design and make F/I on demand... Now everyone would flock to buy a Civic and find themselves in a better situation than someone driving a huge V6 or V8 car while not using the power all the time...

I'm sort of happy at least they're still putting F/I into cars... This died for so long and we haven't seen ANY F/I cars until the WRX release... After that, we're seeing a small but steady market investing some time making F/I cars for us to buy... This might just be the era for superchargers and eventually, maybe the American culture will steer away from the high torque bias to give turbo another chance... With new sports like drifting and the AWD imports creating a stir in the rally scene... They'll soon see the turbo dominance in those sports and the car makers WILL see the difference and put turbos in cars...

NHRA or drag in general SHOULD be supercharger dominated and for those that are serious about doing that SHOULD give superchargers a chance and do a bit of research into the advantages a S/C will give you off the line...

Oh, I didnt know there were 2.0L Surpra's ever. I only new of MR2's with the 2.0L Turbo. Huh. :roll:[/quote]

i never said that supras where 2.0L

a rather obvious reason is emissions. most new cars being developed with forced induction are leaning towards the s/c. while current turbo'd cars can meet current EPA and EU emissions, pretty much all of them will not when stricter emissions guidelines take effect in 2006 or 2007, both here and in Europe
so, why spend development money on making a turbo meet emissions standards when an s/c offers fewer of these worries?

I know I'm going to get hated on because of this, but...

I really don't understand it, but my preference over turbos over superchargers seems to be a psychological thing. It makes me more excited to get a huge rush of power after a short period of weakness than to have a good amount of power throughout. I can't explain it. It's kinda like how people innately prefer dogs over cats. If someone said "I don't know" when you asked them why they like dogs more than cats, would you automatically think that they liked dogs because they're the "IN" pet?

And yes, I love the sound of a blowoff valve. So? I'm not going to lie and say I don't, because I do. But it's not just because of the sound that I prefer turbos, else I'd get one of those simu-pshh adaptors to put in my muffler. You can flame me all you want, but at the end of the day, we ALL love the sound. It's simply whether we choose to lie and be accepted, or be a man and take the flak.

[/truth]

I seriously don't like the sound... I love the WRX because it has a recirculating BOV (well it isn't a BOV if it don't blow) so there was no sound at all, cept the spool which I'm more fond of...

I'm a huge audio buff... I can't even stand muffler noise... I don't like road bumps and wind flutter... I want my car to be as silent as possible while packing a lot of heat... I need the power to move the extra weight....

So not everyone likes the BOV, I personally dispise it...

2.4L engine is SOOO not small... Also, putting turbos in smaller engines gives the best gains since it would show the most significant boost in the shortest amount of time... Trying to fill a bigger area would mean more PSI and usually with added PSI means slower spool times...

Maybe I'm not understanding your point but I'm going to have to disagree with you on this. Putting turbos on larger engines will certainly not increase spool time - large displacement engines pump out more exhaust, spinning the turbo faster, sooner.

With new sports like drifting and the AWD imports creating a stir in the rally scene... They'll soon see the turbo dominance in those sports and the car makers WILL see the difference and put turbos in cars...

NHRA or drag in general SHOULD be supercharger dominated and for those that are serious about doing that SHOULD give superchargers a chance and do a bit of research into the advantages a S/C will give you off the line...

Maybe your two points here are unrelated, but it's important to note that F/I is necessary in rallying because engine size is capped at 2 liters. If you're saying that as the popularity of rallying grows people will become more familiar with turboed cars then I agree with you. Also I'm not too big on the drag scene but I thought many of the dragsters were turboed - and running exotic fuels.

Read up on topfuel... Or any NHRA cars that don't run on regular gas... These are cars that usually sport large blowers that can't bare to lose even a millionth of a second to wait for the F/I to kick in...

As for the larger displacement spools turbos faster, why wouldn't they put a large single turbo in big cars? Most of them come with twin turbos... Now the new ME412 sports quad turbo being a 12 cyl engine... You might get more exhaust, but usually having ONE big turbo to increase enough pressure to support a larger displacement would mean a HUGE turbine... That usually results in a lot more lag... You'll get the bigger peaks tho, but really poor response... The same size turbo from a 4 cyl put into a 6 cyl WILL spin faster, but the gains wouldn't be as significant... This is like saying put a smaller motorcycle turbo in a 4 cyl car and have that spool at idle...

Yeah and I did mean that when the new sports like Rally and Drifting becomes a bit more popular, then people who favor turbos for constant loads (usually track / circut racing since you don't need power to make power) the trubos will become more popular and widely used...

I just want to say one last thing... Buses here use turbos, if anyone like the BOV sound, go drive a bus... :D

The same size turbo from a 4 cyl put into a 6 cyl WILL spin faster, but the gains wouldn't be as significant... This is like saying put a smaller motorcycle turbo in a 4 cyl car and have that spool at idle...

That was my point exactly, and of course larger turbos will have increased spool time... but saying the gains 'wouldn't be as significant' is over simplifying it. Gains are decided by the efficiency of the turbo, and how much air can it push (CFM). Which is why people check out a turbo's compressor map when selecting a unit rather than just relying on peak CFM.

Garrett's GT28RS is performing great on 4 bangers as well as 6s. It's efficient, spools quickly, and moves a lot of air for its size. Obviously comparing motorcycle turbos and v12 quad turbo setups is going to the extreme ends of automotive turbo applications - an efficient turbo can be applied to 4, 6, and arguably 8 cylinder setups.

Undersizing a turbo for a given application, what I think you're talking about when you mention a 'turbo from a 4cyl' is something that really only car makers (like Volkswagen w/the 1.8t) and autoxers do. People like to feel that off the line performance, rarely do people go for top speed runs on a test drive (or ever), and just saying twin turbo can give a potential customer a stiffy.

...that is why I think auto manuf undersize turbos and run multiple turbo setups, I don't consider it more efficent, or more appropriate than a single turbo setup, it's just more appropriate for the auto manufacturers goals.

TRD hasnt yet made a Turbo kit probably for the same reason Mugen hasnt for Honda. Because a Turbo DOES add more wear and tear to your car, it lowers your gas mileage. (Unless you have an Apexi Super Air-Fuel Controller to make your car run super lean.) Also if the Scion xA/xB came with a turbo, the boost can only go so high since the 1NZFE has a 10.5:1 Compression ratio. Boost a little too much (maybe 1
or 2 psi more) and your engine goes bye bye!

Superchargers add leass wear and tear compared to turbos, and they dont produce as much heat in your engine bay. Superchargers are like an NA Tune combined with a Turbo set up, best of both worlds as I see it.

TRD stands for Toyota Racing Development. the Racing division for toyota is Toyota Motor Sports. Those are two divisions. One makes parts, the other uses the parts.



....the preceding was my 2 cents. Sorry if i sound mean, I didnt mean to.

well it doesn't really matter why they decided to put the S/C on there. from what TRD told me when they came to visit was that A) they had already designed a S/C for the camry/solara and B) it takes less time to install for the techs and a lot less if any tuning.

aside from that, an interesting little tidbit they told us was that with the T/C S/C, this is the first time EVER that Toyota JPN has released the computer codes for any reason. up until the T/C any FI that TRD made was pretty much guess and check. they've always stayed like in a vault in Japan. so i thought that was kinda cool.

Another note "There's no replacement for displacement!" Skylines have like a 8.5:1 compression just so they could boost so much. And, I know of a guy with a CTR motor in his civic, he beat a Skyline GTR-33 on the freeway. I know both of them and they afgree the Civic was FAST! I prefer both turbo and NA. for scions Turbo would be okay but i wouldsnt go get a T3 or a T3/T4 hybrid. I would probably get a nice T25.

because of the turbo lag!

i'd rather have a sudden rush of power than a ho-hum delivery of power from zero. and then there's the exhilerating PSS of the blowoff valve that you just can't pass up.

plus superchargers give off this annoying whining noise...

Turbo lag is only a problem with a poorly-sized turbo for the application or a motor running too little compression to have a little response off-boost.

Besides, the TRD supercharger for the tC is a centrifugal unit - which is the compressor side of a turbo spun by a pulley instead of an exhaust-powered turbine. As such, it exhibits the same spool-up problems that people blame on turbos.

You can gear the centrifugal sc to come on early, but at the expense of top-end power.

-Justin

regaurdless what any detailed explination here was said. the point is this.

Turbo = less engine life and smaller power gains at higher boost
SC = more engine life and bigger power gains at smaller boost.

simple as that..

Reasons?

Turbo = Higher RPMS while turbo spools up
SC = Instant power gain from the moment you step on the gas.

Well a supercharger is being used because it is better than a turbocharger, you have constant boost pressure, so better off the line.

You have got to be kidding me. Constant boost? I don't think so. The boost that any supercharger makes is 100% related to rpms that the motor is spinning at. Why? Because all superchargers are belt driven.

A S/C that makes peak boost of 10psi at 6800 rpm is NOT making 10 psi at 3000rpm

You can argue until the cows come home about whether or not a supercharger is better than a turbo and vice versa. Roots type blowers do make torque down low; centrifugal blowers like the one that will be on the tC (per pictures) will not be a torque monster.

There are some advantages to using a supercharger instead of a turbocharger. A supercharger will provide a linear power delivery throughout the RPM range. On average it's easier to make a reliable supercharger over a turbo. You need to worry about heat with a turbo moreso than a supercharger, as it's bolted onto the exhaust and compressing air.

Now let's think about Toyota's goals with the tC. They picked the 2.4 liter I4 from the Camry for it. Notice they did not select the Celica's 1.8. Why? The 2.4 provides better power delivery through its entire range. Its powerband is wider. While high RPM engines making big numbers for their displacements may excite you on a spec sheet, in the real world, they tend to be much less usable.

Now back to the supercharger. Toyota has two concerns: the character the forced induction will create and reliability. A supercharger will enhance the engine's feel positively. The turbo will add lag and make it feel peaky. If they weren't concerned about a linear feel, I doubt they would have selected the engine they did in the first place. I'm sure you can still find a Celica if you want one. Personally, that's not the type of car I want to own. That's why I'm considering a tC.

So why use a turbo? Parasitic loss. As a supercharger is constantly being driven (unless it's on a clutch, in which case it sort of is). This means a certain amount of energy must be expended driving it. Thus, if you are looking for the absolute highest output you can get, a turbo will proabably work better. The TRD unit isn't about extracting all it can out of the engine. It's about enhancing it.

There are some advantages to using a supercharger instead of a turbocharger. A supercharger will provide a linear power delivery throughout the RPM range. On average it's easier to make a reliable supercharger over a turbo. You need to worry about heat with a turbo moreso than a supercharger, as it's bolted onto the exhaust and compressing air.

Now let's think about Toyota's goals with the tC. They picked the 2.4 liter I4 from the Camry for it. Notice they did not select the Celica's 1.8. Why? The 2.4 provides better power delivery through its entire range. Its powerband is wider. While high RPM engines making big numbers for their displacements may excite you on a spec sheet, in the real world, they tend to be much less usable.

Now back to the supercharger. Toyota has two concerns: the character the forced induction will create and reliability. A supercharger will enhance the engine's feel positively. The turbo will add lag and make it feel peaky. If they weren't concerned about a linear feel, I doubt they would have selected the engine they did in the first place. I'm sure you can still find a Celica if you want one. Personally, that's not the type of car I want to own. That's why I'm considering a tC.

So why use a turbo? Parasitic loss. As a supercharger is constantly being driven (unless it's on a clutch, in which case it sort of is). This means a certain amount of energy must be expended driving it. Thus, if you are looking for the absolute highest output you can get, a turbo will proabably work better. The TRD unit isn't about extracting all it can out of the engine. It's about enhancing it.


Well written. Another slight advantage of the turbo that goes along with parasitic drag is fuel economy. A supercharged car will use slightly more fuel than its turbo counterpart regardless of whether or not both drivers have a lead foot.

As was previously mentioned, turbos do have a greater degree of "tunability" whereas when it comes to a supercharger, the amount of boost you can make really comes down to the size of the pulley. Sure you can keep decreasing the size of the pulley but with that comes issues of belt slippage.


Adrian

i think another reason is that toyota has had supercharged engines as long as they have had turbo engines. you guys remember the '88 - '89 factory SC mr2. not to mention that engine is a 1.6L 4AGZE, and in JP was SCed till around '95 or so. as for the xA and xB it just seems proper to do so and make a SC and continue for that small of a displacement.
but for the tC 2.4L its honestly more personal choice, you know for a person who really doesn't know that much about cars, a SC is prolly better. since it is belt driven that person honestly will only have to worry about the belt breaking, but on the other end the turbo is more technical, and i would think requires some knowledge of how it works. as you have a wastegate to limit boost, an intercooler to cool the compressed traveling air, also the oil supply, since the turbo does spin in excess of 100,000+ RPM.

but my honest oppinion... toyota just wants scion to stand out from the crowd.

also you increase the pulley. the 2:1 factor. if you decrease the size of the SC crank pulley you would run less then 1:1, then your engine would rotate faster then your SC can force air in.

i was thinking today that it also might be developed to have the best fuel economy and performance. i seen my first xB and xA today and the window sticker had about 30 - 35 for the xB and 34 - 38 for the xA. so that is a possibility.

i think another reason is that toyota has had supercharged engines as long as they have had turbo engines. you guys remember the '88 - '89 factory SC mr2. not to mention that engine is a 1.6L 4AGZE, and in JP was SCed till around '95 or so. as for the xA and xB it just seems proper to do so and make a SC and continue for that small of a displacement.
but for the tC 2.4L its honestly more personal choice, you know for a person who really doesn't know that much about cars, a SC is prolly better. since it is belt driven that person honestly will only have to worry about the belt breaking, but on the other end the turbo is more technical, and i would think requires some knowledge of how it works. as you have a wastegate to limit boost, an intercooler to cool the compressed traveling air, also the oil supply, since the turbo does spin in excess of 100,000+ RPM.

but my honest oppinion... toyota just wants scion to stand out from the crowd.

also you increase the pulley. the 2:1 factor. if you decrease the size of the SC crank pulley you would run less then 1:1, then your engine would rotate faster then your SC can force air in.


Turbo's dont HAVE to be intercooled and superchargers often ARE intercooled.


Adrian

because of the turbo lag!

i'd rather have a sudden rush of power than a ho-hum delivery of power from zero. and then there's the exhilerating PSS of the blowoff valve that you just can't pass up.


You would be happier with a Honda Civic Si than a Scion tC. They have hardly any torque, and you have to rev to an ungodly RPM range to get any power. It sounds like you're the "look at me" type who loves turning heads making all kinds of noise. Just get a BOV whistle and call it good.

Another reason a factory tuner might go with a supercharger over a turbo: how people drive them. If you want to have fun in the turbo, you'll want to get the RPMs up. And near redline, it'll be LOTS of fun. The supercharger won't give that same crack/adrenaline rush, so you'll be less likely to "beat" the engine. How people drive cars really effect the life of them. That sounds obvious, I know, but compare a Corvette with a 3000GT of a similar year. If you can find any. One will be still be running, one will be pretty rough. One was much more likely to be driven hard than the other.

The psychology of driving?

just a few things...

First of all... AHEM are we forgetting the Alltrac in toyota's turbo Barn :D

second if a person is truly worried about lag with a turbo, that is what a BOV is for, releasing pressure to decrease lag. at least thats the way i understand it, i may be wrong.

and finally Toyota has done a pretty good job matching the propper sized turbos to the right engines... The CT26, and The CT20B both produced gobs of power with an impressive lack of lag for the MR2 and the Alltrac's shared 3SGTE engine.

ok, ill shut up now :)

Cause superchargers are cheap, easy and safer.
TRD isn't part of toyota. It is a separate co.