Search | Car Forums | Gallery | Articles | Helper | AF 350Z | IgorSushko.com | Corporate |
| Latest | 0 Rplys |
|
Car Comparisons Compare any cars and find out what every body else thinks. Just refrain from making stupid comparos like Viper vs. Geo Metro :) |
View Poll Results: Which is best | |||
Turbo | 11 | 50.00% | |
Supercharger | 1 | 4.55% | |
Tuned NA | 10 | 45.45% | |
Voters: 22. You may not vote on this poll |
Show Printable Version | Email this Page | Subscribe to this Thread |
|
Thread Tools |
11-07-2003, 12:28 AM | #1 | |
AF Regular
Join Date: Oct 2003
Posts: 59
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
|
Turbo, Supercharger, or Tuned NA
I just want some opinions on what every one thinks about the best way to get power out of an engine.
My vote is turbo, lets hear it |
|
11-07-2003, 03:58 AM | #2 | |
AF Enthusiast
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 140
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
|
Tuned all-motor of course.
|
|
11-07-2003, 06:28 AM | #3 | |
CFA
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: London
Posts: 9,529
Thanks: 0
Thanked 2 Times in 2 Posts
|
Re: Turbo, Supercharger, or Tuned NA
Call me a purist but NA is the way to go
|
|
11-07-2003, 08:35 AM | #4 | |
Funding the welfare state
|
I chose 'whatever it takes'
Never pay again for live sex! | Hot girls doing naughty stuff for free! | Chat for free!
__________________
Resistance Is Futile (If < 1ohm) |
|
11-07-2003, 11:14 AM | #5 | |
AF Regular
Thread starter
Join Date: Oct 2003
Posts: 59
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
|
Somebodys gotta like supercharging.
There have to be some simple minded people that cant understand why turbo's are better. Bring it! |
|
11-07-2003, 12:01 PM | #6 | |
AF Fanatic
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: city, New York
Posts: 5,761
Thanks: 0
Thanked 1 Time in 1 Post
|
sorry to say but turbo or any forced induction is the way to go esp if your running a little 4 cylinder. hell even a 6 cylinder. its virtually impossible to get a 1.6 liter even if you stroke and bore it to make 400+ hp goin all motor. with the engine work done to it, such as super hot cams and stuff like that. the car is virtually undrivable in the street. plus it would cost a whole lot more to get that kind of power out of a n/a over a turbo. even though a turbo is not cheap but if your making that kind of power with a n/a the powerdelievery is just as bad as a turbo cause instead of turbo lag, you need to rev to like 10K+. even the pro drag racing class thats running n/a can barely make 400+ and they have a hugh budget. yet there is alot more street driven hondas making numbers close to that ( even though its still a very small number) but having a 400hp n/a B series engine that is driven everyday for the street is impossible.
__________________
303whp stock internal KA-T 94 Acura NSX Best E.T. 13.559 Best Trap speed 107.62 mph |
|
11-07-2003, 01:19 PM | #7 | |
The Red Baron
|
For smaller engines the best way to get power is forced induction, no question. In the bigger engines tuning is a better idea. It all really depends on what kind of racing you're doing though.
|
|
11-07-2003, 11:49 PM | #8 | |
AF Regular
|
s/c eazy choice.
no lag, unless u get a centifugal, some take almost no hp from the engine, like 1 hp maybe. o and super easy to add power- just change the pulley and u could go from 8 to 14 no problem.
__________________
"Nothing is better than eternal happiness. Ham sandwiches are better than nothing. Therefore, ham sandwiches are better than eternal happiness." |
|
11-08-2003, 12:20 AM | #9 | |
Quem queritis?
|
All-motor is the only way to go!
__________________
Peace, love, and premium octane. |
|
11-08-2003, 04:46 AM | #10 | |
AF Enthusiast
Join Date: Sep 2003
Posts: 265
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
|
ive owned both turbocharged cars, and all motor of diff types/sizes. and i prefer turbo for performance, so i chose turbo, and n/a for everyday driving.
|
|
11-08-2003, 04:54 AM | #11 | |
AF Enthusiast
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 327
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
|
Re: Turbo, Supercharger, or Tuned NA
Twin Turbo Baby!
__________________
911 Super Targa RSR [Dual Flow Intake][Twin Turbo][Larger List to Come] |
|
11-08-2003, 11:32 AM | #12 | |
AF Regular
Thread starter
Join Date: Oct 2003
Posts: 59
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
|
Did you know that it takes up to 400 HP to run a supercharger on some top fuel dragsters. Dont give me this shit that they dont take any power to run.
And pulley changes arent exactly that easy, well they are.... but you cant do it in real time using a boost controller. Lag is a thing of the past. It happened because of old heavy turbos that were very inefficient. Today there are light ceramic ball bearing turbos that spool up VERY fast. Lag isnt even noticoble and when you put it under the right configuration. And why do you need low end power that a SC offers anyway. Maybe for starting, but it is just a steeper learning curve on driving a car with an oversized turbo. Once you get out of 1st gear due to gear ratios that a 6 speed (or even 5 for that matter) you lose all advantages of a SC over turbo. And on the topic of NA, yes they are more reliable and streetable. For most people a turbo 350 would be WAY too much, but in reality you can turbo a v8 and still have is streetable, just have a in-car adjustable boost controller. Thats the beauty of a turbo. |
|
11-08-2003, 12:17 PM | #13 | |
AF Regular
|
dont give me that bull shit about 'no turbo lag' thats impossible. it it were true and theres no such thing as turbo lag, then that would mean that the turbo is a positive displacement application- it provides constant boost to the engine. a turbo that is positive displacement is lliterally impossible.
yes, i do agree that there are advances in the turbo market, but the exaust still has to spin up the turbo. also, its possible for a turbo to provide more boost, i do agree on that. "top fuel dragsters use s/c that require up to 400 hp to run." really? that sounds way off base. if that were true, then the net gain has to be increadable, like 800 hp atleast. thats some serous boost, if it requres 400hp just to turn the sc pulley. but then again, those cars arn't daily drivers, are they? all a boost controller does is it limits how fast the turbo spins. that has nothing to do w/ changing the s/c pulley. going from 8-14 psi via changing the sc pulley is like adding more Liters to the engine displacement. thats why its called positive displacement its making ur small engine act bigger- litterally.
__________________
"Nothing is better than eternal happiness. Ham sandwiches are better than nothing. Therefore, ham sandwiches are better than eternal happiness." |
|
11-08-2003, 04:20 PM | #14 | |
AF Regular
Thread starter
Join Date: Oct 2003
Posts: 59
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
|
My point about 400 hp to turn a SC on top fuel dragsters is that it takes power to make more power, but under the exact same boost a turbo will provide 10-15% more power than a SC would. That also allows you to run a lower boost to achieve the same HP (less strain on the engine).
Yes, there will always be a "lag" with a turbo because it is a chain reaction of pressures, but it is roughly negligable with new turbos. |
|
11-08-2003, 04:51 PM | #15 | |
AF Regular
Thread starter
Join Date: Oct 2003
Posts: 59
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
|
The gain with the SC is insane, there is no doubt that a SC adds TONS of power, it is like the govt... no matter how much you make... it always takes its piece of the pie. (The top fuel dragsters run at boosts up to 50+ psi and HP well into the thousands)
My point with the boost controller was that you theoretically could be sitting in a very streetable car running on 5 lbs and with a few clicks you could bump it up to 15 lbs and be a viper killer. Cant really do that with a SC. |
|
|
POST REPLY TO THIS THREAD |
Thread Tools | |
|
|