Turbo or Supercharger

I have a 98 civic ex coupe with a b16a2 in it and I was going to go turbo, but lately I have been thinking of getting a charger instead...I think that it would be cheaper and maybe even better, but I am not sure. Could you guys help me out....snail or charger...I really like the sound of a turbo, but if the charger is better I will go with that.

Let me know what you guys think! I was going to go with a Garrett T3/4 snail, but now might go with a Vortech charger...which do you think is better? Thanks!

turbo charger
:uhoh:

Definitly go with a turbo. Superchargers are good becuase they always have power on demand but in the long run turbo's are more upgradeable and they give you all the cool sounds. As for price wise, you can get a turbo kit that costs way less than a supercharger. You could even put your own kit together.

Definitly go with a turbo. Superchargers are good becuase they always have power on demand but in the long run turbo's are more upgradeable and they give you all the cool sounds. As for price wise, you can get a turbo kit that costs way less than a supercharger. You could even put your own kit together.

NO NO NO NO NO! If you don't know what you're talking about, or if you just think you know what you're talking about, don't say anything! That's how misinformation spreads and all of a sudden non-vtec heads are better than vtec heads for turbos, etc, etc.

A vortech like he is thinking of does NOT always have power on demand. In fact, it's quite the opposite. A vortech makes boost proportional to RPM's. If you have a kit pullied for 10 pounds of boost, it makes 10 pounds of boost at redline. At say 4000 RPM's where a medium sized turbo will be making all 10 pounds of boost the vortech might be making 2 or 3 pounds of boost. If you're thinking of a roots blower, sure, it will have full boost pretty much anywhere from around 2000 RPM's and up, but they are not nearly as efficient as turbos and centrifugals, take more power to turn, and are harder to intercool, not to mention top end boost drop that you always get. Heres a little chart I made to show you what I mean.

http://files.automotiveforums.com/gallery/watermark.php?file=/503/25655boost-med.jpg

nice chart :D

Thanks for the chart that clarifys it and anyone who would go with the vortech is a dumbass and that is why I had to ask someone....because I could have made a horrible mistake! Thank you.

About a kit...I have on in mind that my buddy had:

- Garrett t3/4 snail
-tial wastegate 35mm ( I think)
-HKS type S BOV
-Spearco front mount intercooler
-custom pipes
-thermal turbo exaust...But I think there is a A'pexi N1 turbo exaust, isn't there? If so then I will get that.
-cusco racing clutch

just a starting list of the basics...tell me what else I need if I forgot anything....I was also curious about how much all this is going to cost.
Thanks a lot guys!
:biggrin:

NO NO NO NO NO! If you don't know what you're talking about, or if you just think you know what you're talking about, don't say anything! That's how misinformation spreads and all of a sudden non-vtec heads are better than vtec heads for turbos, etc, etc.

A vortech like he is thinking of does NOT always have power on demand. In fact, it's quite the opposite. A vortech makes boost proportional to RPM's. If you have a kit pullied for 10 pounds of boost, it makes 10 pounds of boost at redline.

Sorry about the misinfo. It's just everytime iv'e read or even heard about a supercharger, it's been a roots style and the person whom installed it afterwards made it seem like power was always there like a bigger engine. Guess I shouldn't have made the assumption that all superchargers worked this way. The way you explained the vortech it sounds like it would be really sucky. Who would want 10lbs of boost only at the top rpm? You could never get a maximum effieciency out of it because even if you did turn up the boost to get some midrange you would end up at like 20lbs up top which your engine might not be able to hold. Anyway, sorry again about the misinfo.

Stop by www.clubsi.com

Drop by the boost forums for your boost issues. :biggrin:

A vortech like he is thinking of does NOT always have power on demand. In fact, it's quite the opposite. A vortech makes boost proportional to RPM's. If you have a kit pullied for 10 pounds of boost, it makes 10 pounds of boost at redline. At say 4000 RPM's where a medium sized turbo will be making all 10 pounds of boost the vortech might be making 2 or 3 pounds of boost. If you're thinking of a roots blower, sure, it will have full boost pretty much anywhere from around 2000 RPM's and up, but they are not nearly as efficient as turbos and centrifugals, take more power to turn, and are harder to intercool, not to mention top end boost drop that you always get. Heres a little chart I made to show you what I mean.

http://files.automotiveforums.com/gallery/watermark.php?file=/503/25655boost-med.jpg
first off i just a want to say thanks for the visual since im more of a visual learner, well most guys are for that matter, but i do see some things that are kinda strange. it was hard for me to pin point the problem since u made a chart to measure boost not hp. my first question is, since the supercharger is going off the rpm's shouldn't the boost already be at idle which is around 1500? so by going off your explaination, the supercharger should already have more boost to begin with, and not at 0. another thing was how the boost for the turbo charger jump up so quickly, i really can't see how thats happening for a medium size turbo? to be a little more specific what im talking about is turbo lag, which in your chart there seems to be barely any. for a real life example would be a guy i know who has a stage 2 (medium) turbo kit in his 93 gsr, and he tells me the kick doesn't start till between 4000-4500 rpm's due to turbo lag. for more proof here a visual of a rev hard stage 1 turbo which is the smallest version on an acura rsx
http://www.revhard.com/pics/dynosheets/RSX6PSI1a.JPG http://www.revhard.com/pics/dynosheets/03sidyno1.jpg

heres another from a civic si. what im trying to point out with these pictures is that the gains aren't really significant till later in the higher rpm range and if u look closely these guys aren't even starting at 2000 rpm. so in other words the s/c should start of stronger, but later on the t/c should catch up, then pass the boost for the sc.heres one of their stage three just for the heck of it and look at the lag on this thing!

http://www.revhard.com/pics/dynosheets/hypodyno1.jpg now im not trying to call ur chart bs since it does make sense if that was a really small turbo, but with a small turbo theres really not much hp gains. i just think u should give a better representation of each, although if it was me i would go turbo all the way whether turbo lag or no turbo lag.
reason 1-achieve more hp gains
reason 2-its creating power out of waste, unlike the the sc which is using power from the crank to make more power.
reason 3-the blow off valve sounds really freaken cool, although its porpose is bad, but a good kinda bad if u know what i mean.

The reason his graph looks different than your three is because he plotted boost vs. rpm. As you said your friends gsr makes full boost at about 4500 rpms. On his graph full boost doesn't come until 4100. The reason your graphs seem to rise more slowly is because alot of the high revving engines we love don't make max power until high up in the rpm band. So with a constant amount of boost, it should be the same shape as a stock motor.

The graph I made was a general rough estimate, I didn't take any actual data and plot it, it was just to give you a rough idea of what the boost curve might look like. In all honesty, the first few charts don't tell you much about the spool characteristics of the turbos, because how quick the turbos spool and how much power they make is totally dependant on how well the car is tuned. If your friends GSR isn't making full boost till 4500 with a smaller turbo, something is wrong. I'm running an SC61 .60 A/R compressor .63 A/R exhaust stage 5 wheel and i'm starting to make boost at around 3400-3600, and I have 1 bar by 4300.

Does anyone know about how much this kit will cost?


About a kit...I have on in mind that my buddy had:

- Garrett t3/4 snail
-tial wastegate 35mm ( I think)
-HKS type S BOV
-Spearco front mount intercooler
-custom pipes
-thermal turbo exaust...But I think there is a A'pexi N1 turbo exaust, isn't there? If so then I will get that.
-cusco racing clutch

just a starting list of the basics...tell me what else I need if I forgot anything....I was also curious about how much all this is going to cost.
Thanks a lot guys!
:biggrin:

The reason his graph looks different than your three is because he plotted boost vs. rpm. As you said your friends gsr makes full boost at about 4500 rpms. On his graph full boost doesn't come until 4100. The reason your graphs seem to rise more slowly is because alot of the high revving engines we love don't make max power until high up in the rpm band. So with a constant amount of boost, it should be the same shape as a stock motor.

im not trying to be a jacka$$, but everything u just wrote i either already mention or know :screwy:. What im tring to explain is that all turbos have lag time, u don't just press on the gas and boom your at full boost. it takes a sec or 2 before enough exhaust can spool the turbine at the desired psi. with the supercharger there is no wait since its in constantly motion with the engine, although u won't get good hp results as with the turbocharger.

The graph I made was a general rough estimate, I didn't take any actual data and plot it, it was just to give you a rough idea of what the boost curve might look like. In all honesty, the first few charts don't tell you much about the spool characteristics of the turbos, because how quick the turbos spool and how much power they make is totally dependant on how well the car is tuned. If your friends GSR isn't making full boost till 4500 with a smaller turbo, something is wrong. I'm running an SC61 .60 A/R compressor .63 A/R exhaust stage 5 wheel and i'm starting to make boost at around 3400-3600, and I have 1 bar by 4300.

i do understand that what your trying to do as far as a rough estimate, but i just think your missing some really crutial factors with the draw backs on turbos'. as far as the chart goes it's hard to tell about the characteristics with the first two since those were both stage one (small) turbos and second this chart's purpose wasn't created to measure the boost, but u can definately see where it finally spools with the last one. due too it's huge size, its going to take longer to spool and reach the desired psi's that's why u don't see the jump until 5000 rpm's.

with my friends gsr, he has a rev hard stage 2 (medium) turbo thats why it takes longer to spool, but i bet he can bring it down some if he tune it up correctly. still there is going to be the dreaded turbo lag which a supercharger doesn't have to deal with. :banghead:

What im tring to explain is that all turbos have lag time, u don't just press on the gas and boom your at full boost. it takes a sec or 2 before enough exhaust can spool the turbine at the desired psi. with the supercharger there is no wait since its in constantly motion with the engine, although u won't get good hp results as with the turbocharger.

All turbos have some lag, yes. Like I said, I have full boost with my SC61 by around 4500, and people have made almost 600 WHP on a honda with them, which is more than you ever need in a street car. My point was I downshift to almost any gear doing 60 on the highway and give it some gas and I have FULL boost. Typically if I'm gonna go from a roll I drop it into third, and at 60 MPH that's around 5300 RPM's, i'll pace them for a while and whenever we're gonna go I hit it, the motor loads up, and I have full instant boost in a fraction of a second, which is WAY more than what a centrifugal could make. And stop using useless names like a stage 2 or a stage 1 turbo, that means absolutley nothing except in grand turismo or some other not real games, unless you're talking about the exhaust wheel trim in a turbo with a T3 exhaust housing and wheel.

im not trying to be a jacka$$, but everything u just wrote i either already mention or know :screwy:. What im tring to explain is that all turbos have lag time, u don't just press on the gas and boom your at full boost. it takes a sec or 2 before enough exhaust can spool the turbine at the desired psi. .


In your first post you said that In his graph it looked like boost came up really quickly. If you look at the graph you will see that full boost isn't made until around 4000 rpm's. This seems pretty "laggy" to me.

And stop using useless names like a stage 2 or a stage 1 turbo, that means absolutley nothing except in grand turismo or some other not real games, unless you're talking about the exhaust wheel trim in a turbo with a T3 exhaust housing and wheel.

im calling these by thier setup name, not because it sounds cool, so no these aren't useless names im making up. here i show u the three stages rev hard offers. this breaks it down and what kind of hp u'll be getting from each. with stage three u basically have to change everything in the engine bay to gain that kind of power, this is the kind of kit u would want if u want to have a 9sec honda. http://www.revhard.com/turbo_kits.html

oh and what u quoted me for in the prior post this is from idle, since this is what we were refering to on the chart. at highway speed u shouldn't be waiting for boost a great deal at all because of the higher rpm's. also on a highway this is a different situation where u already have the most of the boost needed to spool your turbine.

In your first post you said that In his graph it looked like boost came up really quickly. If you look at the graph you will see that full boost isn't made until around 4000 rpm's. This seems pretty "laggy" to me.

well first of all this chart is a general idea of how they work but im going explain why that chart shows the turbo boost barely have any lag if any. first don't look at the t/c boost but at the s/c. b4 i go on please refer back to the chart to help get a better understanding. now the s/c is at a constant speed with the engine. u get that part right? so at 1000 rpm's the s/c is 0 (which actually suppose to be a 1 psi). now at 2000 rpm this is let say at 1.5 psi. at 3000 this is at 2.5. u get me so far? the point here is that th s/c is corresponding with the engine rpms at an angle shown on th chart & this is with no lag at all.

now lets go to the t/c. at 1000rpm it's at 0psi. at 2000 rpm's it surpassed the s/c already to 4 psi. want to repeat at 2000rpm's it's @4psi!! and at 3000 it's @7psi's!!! now do u see anywhere where the lag is occurring? i don't. right after 1000 rpm's it has more boost then the s/c which is not possible unless u have nitrous to help spool the turbine.

now a more realistis view would be, due to the lag time the t/c boost should be below the s/c from 1000 to around 3500 even 4000 sometimes. then after sufficient exhaust has passed through the turbine, that's when the boost jumps up pass the s/c to 10 psi's. it might be hard to understand, but hopefully u get the idea where the lag is now.

, due to the lag time the t/c boost should be below the s/c from 1000 to around 3500 even 4000 sometimes. then after sufficient exhaust has passed through the turbine, that's when the boost jumps up pass the s/c to 10 psi's. it might be hard to understand, but hopefully u get the idea where the lag is now.

So your saying that the t/c graph should be more of an exponential like
y=x^2 if you know what that looks like. Kinda like a half of a U.
I understand what your saying now.

So your saying that the t/c graph should be more of an exponential like
y=x^2 if you know what that looks like. Kinda like a half of a U.
I understand what your saying now.

yep u got it. the correct mathmatic formula for that shape though i believe is:
b=-0.001(r)^3+0.1(r)^2, where r=rpms, b=boost and the constant can change due to t/c size. this should give u that half of a u shape. so my explanation wasn't that bad then right? i thought for a sec i might have to create a visual aid.