Turbo Vs. Supercharger
06-25-2012, 08:00 PM
#1
Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 34
Turbo Vs. Supercharger
I am writing this from the perspective of a non gearhead. I want to hear some feedback on forced induction for the FRS, not planning on tracking the car, mainly just an everyday driver. So lets hear it, turbo vs supercharger pros and cons-
06-25-2012, 10:04 PM
#3
Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 34
aaah
Thanks for the feedback! I have had a boosted car, I had a civic SI with a vortec supercharger with air to water intercooler. The thing was ridiculous! From what I hear, (and noticed with the SC) is that it gave me more immedeatte HP and speed. As soon as it reached say, 3500 rpm's in each gear, you could feel it throw you back in your seat with no lag, which was great! I have no experience with a turbo though. I have heard that turbos can be harder on motors over time than SC? My ultimate goal is to reach about 280-300 HP with my FR-S, plenty of speen for me! I'm not looking to be the biggest boy on nthe block, I just want to have a fast, RWD car to blow by a 350Z that rolls up next to me! LOL! Greddy is actually coming out with a turbo kit for FRS very soon from what I've heard!
06-25-2012, 10:22 PM
#4
Senior Member
SL Member
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 113
When you say lift off, do you mean like lifting front wheels off the ground? I'm sure an xB is balanced, just not to Ferrari's specs lol.
My preference would be to go turbo. With the amount of torque the FR-S makes, I'd say a turbocharger over the centrifugal supercharger (HKS). It will probably cost more considering the extra cooling piping that will most likely come with it other turbo kit goodies (wastegate, manifold) besides maybe deleting primary cats, but as far as performance and satisfaction, bolt on turbo should hit the spot. The only issue I see everyone notices is the high 12.5 to 1 compression ratio the car has. With direct injection, I don't really see that being a huge problem, but it looks like the car may only run reliability on lower boost, though, without proof, that is to be discovered.
Either way, it's up to you. The car will be faster and hopefully funner lol.
My preference would be to go turbo. With the amount of torque the FR-S makes, I'd say a turbocharger over the centrifugal supercharger (HKS). It will probably cost more considering the extra cooling piping that will most likely come with it other turbo kit goodies (wastegate, manifold) besides maybe deleting primary cats, but as far as performance and satisfaction, bolt on turbo should hit the spot. The only issue I see everyone notices is the high 12.5 to 1 compression ratio the car has. With direct injection, I don't really see that being a huge problem, but it looks like the car may only run reliability on lower boost, though, without proof, that is to be discovered.
Either way, it's up to you. The car will be faster and hopefully funner lol.
06-25-2012, 10:28 PM
#5
This is not a apples to apples comparo. Most people are going to come in here and bash S/C's, but it is because they were exposed to the vortech TRD unit (which is what I have in my tc myself). its not really a shining example of the best s/c unit.
For someone to come in and say "for the price, go turbo" is not accurate. It depends on your goals, and WHY your doing it, along with what is available for the car/application itself. I have seen some of those rotrax designed setups, they are insane. Other cars (mustang) for example use the roush kits, and make MASSIVE power (Up to 750hp) Look at the ProCharger kits, they retail around 5-7k too.
Turbo kits always seem to be more "universal" by the companies that market them, where as a lot of the S/C kits are SPECIFIC to each car. I think this is due to more popularity and availability. The turbo itself can be jammed into different places that a large s/c setup may not fit.
If you want a car for time attack or autox - I think the RIGHT s/c setup is better than a off the shelf turbo. You know what the pros/cons are. The s/c can be left in its exact power band due to it being gear/RPM driven - no lag.. Its progressive an linear. A turbo Can be dialed in to do the same thing, but for the most part have a little amount of lag. Another pro is the wicked whine of the s/c
Personally, I am sure the turbo kits are going to be more popular for the car as they are more of the "trend" now. You can also make more power, cheaper usaully with a turbo. They are pretty reliable. They can be made to do exactly what you want, peaky power or mid range grunt.
You should consult your local speed shop, and see what they recommend. If it were me, I would stop power output at the 300hp range, as much more than that might not really benefit you the same exponentially. The most important thing with cars (to me), is its not how much power it makes, but how much power can you get to the ground, and the car can use it 100%. if your making 500hp, but cant hook up - its pointless.. although it reminds me of the 1000 supra from hell
For someone to come in and say "for the price, go turbo" is not accurate. It depends on your goals, and WHY your doing it, along with what is available for the car/application itself. I have seen some of those rotrax designed setups, they are insane. Other cars (mustang) for example use the roush kits, and make MASSIVE power (Up to 750hp) Look at the ProCharger kits, they retail around 5-7k too.
Turbo kits always seem to be more "universal" by the companies that market them, where as a lot of the S/C kits are SPECIFIC to each car. I think this is due to more popularity and availability. The turbo itself can be jammed into different places that a large s/c setup may not fit.
If you want a car for time attack or autox - I think the RIGHT s/c setup is better than a off the shelf turbo. You know what the pros/cons are. The s/c can be left in its exact power band due to it being gear/RPM driven - no lag.. Its progressive an linear. A turbo Can be dialed in to do the same thing, but for the most part have a little amount of lag. Another pro is the wicked whine of the s/c
Personally, I am sure the turbo kits are going to be more popular for the car as they are more of the "trend" now. You can also make more power, cheaper usaully with a turbo. They are pretty reliable. They can be made to do exactly what you want, peaky power or mid range grunt.
You should consult your local speed shop, and see what they recommend. If it were me, I would stop power output at the 300hp range, as much more than that might not really benefit you the same exponentially. The most important thing with cars (to me), is its not how much power it makes, but how much power can you get to the ground, and the car can use it 100%. if your making 500hp, but cant hook up - its pointless.. although it reminds me of the 1000 supra from hell
06-25-2012, 10:46 PM
#6
Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 34
Very helpful, thank you. I agree with everything you said and am probably leaning more towards SC. I'll consult my speed shop. Your rite, most people seem to be pretty biased to turbos vs SC now days. Arent SC belt driven? and turbos are exhaust driven yes?
06-25-2012, 10:58 PM
#7
Senior Member
SL Member
Scinergy
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Fontana, CA
Posts: 651
I own (80k miles) and have driven my supercharged tC for over 45k miles.
From the stock SC'd delivery of around 190whp to the current ~230whp the supercharger has been a blast. Like stated previously, the SC provides instant and constant power all the way through 6000rpm. It isn't the power of being thrown back in your seat; however, it is a firm push as you accelerate.
I honestly feel safer in my car because of the power from the SC, if I need to escape from an idiot driver, aggressive driver or an inattentive driver I can easily keep my distance and keep them behind me.
Short on-ramps have nothing on my car and the longer ones just let me pass more people who would rather merge into a 65pmh zone doing 50mph.... slowbies!
As it always has been, Turbo vs Supercharger comes down to application and user preference.
From the stock SC'd delivery of around 190whp to the current ~230whp the supercharger has been a blast. Like stated previously, the SC provides instant and constant power all the way through 6000rpm. It isn't the power of being thrown back in your seat; however, it is a firm push as you accelerate.
I honestly feel safer in my car because of the power from the SC, if I need to escape from an idiot driver, aggressive driver or an inattentive driver I can easily keep my distance and keep them behind me.
Short on-ramps have nothing on my car and the longer ones just let me pass more people who would rather merge into a 65pmh zone doing 50mph.... slowbies!
As it always has been, Turbo vs Supercharger comes down to application and user preference.
06-26-2012, 05:32 PM
#10
Senior Member
SL Member
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 113
Yes, superchargers are belt driven (adding to unsprung weight) and turbochargers are exhaust driven (no unsprung, but pass more heat from exhaust to intake making intercooler a better idea).
Well, to be honest, the TRD supercharger has way more lag than lets say Descendant or Ptunings turbo kits. They'll get full boost 8-10 psi at around 3k rpms, where as the TRD supercharger will hit 6-7 psi at 6k rpm almost exactly. Unless you are making 600 to 1000 whp (or 450 to 600 whp on a tC) is the only time where you will experience any kind of what feels like long term lag. Going on about Roush Mustangs, I think they use quiet superchargers now, as there is no loud whine from them anymore. Saleen uses the loud twin screws. I don't see an FR-S getting an Eaton Roots or Twin screw anytime soon. Those superchargers usually take some low end torque to get them going, but I'm sure they are set up to improve down low as well. In other words, either type will benefit if set up correctly.
Back to the point, he is refering to the FR-S on a simple under 10 or 15 psi. Most likely just changing some injectors, spark plugs, cat removal or replacement, maybe air intake, and piggy back. The FR-S, which is so new, the first reply had a great point, without trial and error it's harder to say what will or wont work. Though, with a turbocharger you could get a smaller one, set boost at 5-6 psi and if you wanted a little more, you could easily set it to 10-12 psi where with supercharger you would have to change pulleys maybe mess with belts, though with some people that's no problem. With a supercharger, unless you pay more for a clutch type, there is no way to turn it off, it will always be turned by your motor and will most likely make less mpgs especially city mpgs with a higher psi set up I'm referring to normal econo-minded driving. On the highway, it MAY be a tiny bit better or negligable because of the extra air creating less suction for your pistons. With a turbo in the city, there is no extra unsprung weight for the motor to pull, and MAY benefit in city and hwy or be negligable except for the extra heat which is virtually eliminated by the intercooler.
Well, to be honest, the TRD supercharger has way more lag than lets say Descendant or Ptunings turbo kits. They'll get full boost 8-10 psi at around 3k rpms, where as the TRD supercharger will hit 6-7 psi at 6k rpm almost exactly. Unless you are making 600 to 1000 whp (or 450 to 600 whp on a tC) is the only time where you will experience any kind of what feels like long term lag. Going on about Roush Mustangs, I think they use quiet superchargers now, as there is no loud whine from them anymore. Saleen uses the loud twin screws. I don't see an FR-S getting an Eaton Roots or Twin screw anytime soon. Those superchargers usually take some low end torque to get them going, but I'm sure they are set up to improve down low as well. In other words, either type will benefit if set up correctly.
Back to the point, he is refering to the FR-S on a simple under 10 or 15 psi. Most likely just changing some injectors, spark plugs, cat removal or replacement, maybe air intake, and piggy back. The FR-S, which is so new, the first reply had a great point, without trial and error it's harder to say what will or wont work. Though, with a turbocharger you could get a smaller one, set boost at 5-6 psi and if you wanted a little more, you could easily set it to 10-12 psi where with supercharger you would have to change pulleys maybe mess with belts, though with some people that's no problem. With a supercharger, unless you pay more for a clutch type, there is no way to turn it off, it will always be turned by your motor and will most likely make less mpgs especially city mpgs with a higher psi set up I'm referring to normal econo-minded driving. On the highway, it MAY be a tiny bit better or negligable because of the extra air creating less suction for your pistons. With a turbo in the city, there is no extra unsprung weight for the motor to pull, and MAY benefit in city and hwy or be negligable except for the extra heat which is virtually eliminated by the intercooler.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
2013, cost, enhancement, frs, greddy, handle, horsepower, kit, kits, price, scion, supercharger, turbo, upgrades, xb2
