TOO! many superchargers!

Is it just me or does Ford put a supercharger in evry damn car they make,whats next a s'charged windstar. Atleast good companys can get power out of a plain engine without a bunch of crap on it. Dont get me wrong forced induction is great to a certain degree but c'mon if it wernt for the supercharger on the GT it would be just a 300hp v8, look at Z06 its got 405hp and no s'charger or nothing.


:nono:

ford doesn't supercharger the gt, only the SVT Cobra. and it's a 4.6 liter going up agianst a 5.7. if you want to compare Chevy and Ford engines, compare the Cobra R's 5.4 (390 hp, 385 ft/lb's) vs the Z06's 5.7 (405 hp ???) Ithe cobra R's engine has it beat by displacment to power ratio

ford does 2 hav a supercharger in the gt just look at the new motor trend it says 500bhp s'charged v8

ford does 2 hav a supercharger in the gt just look at the new motor trend it says 500bhp s'charged v8

Isn't motor trend the same magazine that said the Subaru Impreza WRX STI is super-charged?

when did it say that

ohhhh the new new ones... yea the gt's are supercharged. But they are't even out yet

Hate to burst your bubble, but technically the WRX Sti is supercharged, turbocharging is a subcategory of supercharging. Technically a turbocharger is a type of supercharger. But for the sake of clairity they should have differentiated by saying it was turbocharged.

tourbo isnt a type of supercharger its just another form of forced induction

the only difference between a super and turbo is how they spool up. The turbos are more effective but they have turbo lag. They both have compresspor housing the only diff is the super doesnt use exhaust. Same concept diff source of spooling power. besides power is power how you get it doesnt matter. I am sure taht Ford could oull just as much out of their engins if they wanted to. It all comes down to which way is cheaper and more appealing to the consumer. This whole conversation is pointless. Power is power and companies wnat to make money, any joe shmo with money will buy something supercharged just because it is supercharged.

Turbochargers and Superchargers do the same thing in a different way and Centrifugal type Superchargers work a lot like Turbochargers. Nitrous is the same thing as well. They only differ in delivery method. They all do the same thing; push more oxygen into the cylinders.

I would agree that Ford does go overboard with the Superchargers. The SVT team should stand for Supercharged Vehicles Team since only two of them aren't. Chevy and Dodge can make loads of power from their N/A V8s. I would think Ford could do the same.

Straight from the dictionary of automotive terms.
"Turbocharger: An exhaust powered turbine super-charger. Turbochargers always use centrifugal-flow compressors, which operate efficiently at the high rotational speeds produced by the exhaust turbine. See blower. "

From the Glossary in Corky Bell's "Maximum Boost"
"Turbocharger. A turbocharger is a supercharger driven by a turbine."

From M-20 turbos, inc. website
"A turbocharger is a type of supercharger which is energized by exhaust gas spinning the drive side of a double pinwheel or turbine. The other side, or driven side of the pinwheel is another turbine which compresses ambient air to a given value. The purpose is to provide extra oxygen for combustion with the fuel, sometimes to cancel out the loss of power piston engines experience with increased altitude, sometimes to provide more power than the engine can normally produce."

From Superchargers online
"The Turbocharger
You may be wondering where the turbocharger fits in to this equation. Technically, a turbocharger IS a type of supercharger - one that is driven by exhaust gasses rather than from a pulley that draws power from the engine's crank. Because we have covered this topic in depth in our Turbos vs. Superchargers article, we will not re-examine the differences again here. Because the turbocharger relies on a technology substantially different from the three traditional supercharger technologies discussed above, it is beyond the scope of this article."

A turbocharger IS a type of supercharger.

Honestly, who cares? There are three ways to make horsepower: displacement, RPM and forced induction. Virtually every engine uses some combination of two of these methods, why critique one approach versus another when the results are the same? The ZO6 motor is pathetic in specific horsepower output per liter when compared to your average Honda engine, does that mean GM is in some way deficient as far as powertrain engineering is concerned? No, it simply means that GM is more interested in producing a 400hp motor using 5.7L of displacement with a 6500 RPM redline and two valve/cylinder V8 pushrod layout than say Ferrari, who instead prefers a 3.6L DOHC 4 valve/cylinder V8 that revs 2000 RPM higher for the same result (think 360 Modena). Further, SVT should be commended for doing such a great job in squeezing lots of extra power from existing powertrains under close corporate supervision, how they do this shouldn't be nearly as important as the accomplishment itself. Nobody shits on AMG for doing the same with Mercedes powertrains, so why pick on SVT?

Ps- Supercharging is supercharging. Anytime you use a mechanical device to fill the cylinders beyond ambient air pressure you are supercharging the motor, regardless whether the device is belt or exhaust driven. For this reason a turbo is technically a form of supercharger. For this same reason nitrous isn't supercharging, it's forced induction. Nitrous oxide does have higher oxygen content by volume than normal air (33% vs. 21%), but it's not overfilling the cylinders beyond ambient pressure through a mechanical device.

ford doesn't supercharger the gt, only the SVT Cobra. and it's a 4.6 liter going up agianst a 5.7. if you want to compare Chevy and Ford engines, compare the Cobra R's 5.4 (390 hp, 385 ft/lb's) vs the Z06's 5.7 (405 hp ???) Ithe cobra R's engine has it beat by displacment to power ratio


You do realize that the Cobra R was basically a street legal race car right? Hard to compare the two.

You do realize that the Cobra R was basically a street legal race car right? Hard to compare the two.
Car for car, of course. Engine for engine, the 5.4 in the Cobra R isn't anywhere near race spec. The Le Mans Prototype class is using Robert Yates built 5.0L modular Ford engines, and they are producing 500hp with a 7000 RPM redline. Show me any LS based GM motor producing 100hp/liter with a 7000 RPM redline in NA trim.

my engine doesnt make hp useing displacement rpm or forced induction

It's too funny to see so many people up in arms cause Ford is using superchargers. It's oh so great when any import company uses a Turbo or TT to make thier cars fast.
Next the new GT's are not S/C, they are going to be 3V 4.6. The 2V S/C motor you must of read about is the new 5.4 2V S/C Lighting motor speculated at 500hp.

tourbo isnt a type of supercharger its just another form of forced induction
I was going to own you but I guess a few more have already done it. LOL

just to let everyone know. GT mustangs dont have superchargers. They are shipped out to Saleen and supped up with supercharger etc. Cobras came with superchargers in 2003. You cant tell me otherwise cause those r the facts.

The 03 Cobra runs mid 12s buddy and it is one of the fastest cars out yet the only car that is able to keep up with it is a Subaru WRX STi

03svt- Your point was made in the second post of this thread by Twyzz, only the originator of the thread thought otherwise.

There are several cars that can outrun a stock SVT Cobra, but none at it's price point. It's one helluva good drag car, if only the chassis were up to snuff on turning and burning.