Why not Supercharger instead of Turbo?
v_knot
02-05-2002, 09:04 AM
I asked this very same question in the SE-R forum. Does anyone knows the feasibility of the supercharger application in the G20? What are the significant differences between the two, ie. pros and cons? Any feedback would be much appreciated. Many thanks.
jIm
jIm
G-Forces
02-05-2002, 09:12 AM
Noone really bothers with supercharging an SR20DE because everything is basically there for a turbo already. So it's easier to setup a good turbo kit.
Personally I like turbos better. More preformance potential, no matter what anyone says! ;)
Personally I like turbos better. More preformance potential, no matter what anyone says! ;)
v_knot
02-05-2002, 09:36 AM
So availability is key here? I know a supercharger can put out a lot more hp and it is more efficient as well. This is the main reason why the supercharger is largely used in aerospace industry for normally aspirated piston engines. Thought same application can be applied to automotive.
b-b00gie
02-05-2002, 09:41 AM
Originally posted by v_knot
I asked this very same question in the SE-R forum. Does anyone knows the feasibility of the supercharger application in the G20? What are the significant differences between the two, ie. pros and cons? Any feedback would be much appreciated. Many thanks.
jIm
Superchargers are for sissies! :D
I asked this very same question in the SE-R forum. Does anyone knows the feasibility of the supercharger application in the G20? What are the significant differences between the two, ie. pros and cons? Any feedback would be much appreciated. Many thanks.
jIm
Superchargers are for sissies! :D
b-b00gie
02-05-2002, 09:42 AM
Originally posted by v_knot
I know a supercharger can put out a lot more hp and it is more efficient as well.
Sorry, that statement is full of hot air! ...no pun intended!
If you think that's true, prove it...
I know a supercharger can put out a lot more hp and it is more efficient as well.
Sorry, that statement is full of hot air! ...no pun intended!
If you think that's true, prove it...
frogg
02-05-2002, 10:28 AM
There was a huuuuuugggge thread on this not too long back.
v_knot
02-05-2002, 10:42 AM
Originally posted by b-b00gie
Sorry, that statement is full of hot air! ...no pun intended!
If you think that's true, prove it...
I wish I can explain in one word but maybe this one link can help reveals some of the theoretical questions about a supercharger:
http://www.superchargersonline.com/techarticles.asp
Sorry, that statement is full of hot air! ...no pun intended!
If you think that's true, prove it...
I wish I can explain in one word but maybe this one link can help reveals some of the theoretical questions about a supercharger:
http://www.superchargersonline.com/techarticles.asp
T4 Primera
02-05-2002, 10:58 AM
OH NO! Not again .........
b-b00gie
02-05-2002, 11:04 AM
Know the website well...
Please prove how superchargers make more HP and are more efficient. Thousands of people would like to hear that answer.
Roots superchargers can add up to 40% power increase.
Centrifugal superchargers can add up to 100% power increase.
On an SR20DE (124whp stock) that can put you to a max of 248whp.
Do you still believe turbochargers make less power?
Turbochargers are pretty damn effecient. They use the typically wasted exhaust gas to charge the engine w/ air. Superchargers charge the air by using the engine and crankshaft. That is wasting potential HP since you need HP to make more HP.
Do you still believe turbochargers are less efficient?
BTW, there has been countless instances where supercharger companies' claims have been put to rest. Supercharger companies are notorious for publishing completely false information in order to make supercharging appear better than turbocharging.
The only down side to turbo's is lag, but guess what.. superchargers have lag too!!
Turbos win. Hands down. :p
Please prove how superchargers make more HP and are more efficient. Thousands of people would like to hear that answer.
Roots superchargers can add up to 40% power increase.
Centrifugal superchargers can add up to 100% power increase.
On an SR20DE (124whp stock) that can put you to a max of 248whp.
Do you still believe turbochargers make less power?
Turbochargers are pretty damn effecient. They use the typically wasted exhaust gas to charge the engine w/ air. Superchargers charge the air by using the engine and crankshaft. That is wasting potential HP since you need HP to make more HP.
Do you still believe turbochargers are less efficient?
BTW, there has been countless instances where supercharger companies' claims have been put to rest. Supercharger companies are notorious for publishing completely false information in order to make supercharging appear better than turbocharging.
The only down side to turbo's is lag, but guess what.. superchargers have lag too!!
Turbos win. Hands down. :p
v_knot
02-05-2002, 12:44 PM
Me no spek Inglisss....me no nutting..... :p
Well, seriously I didn't know that there were previous discussions on this issue. The point that I am trying to comprehend here is the feasibility of the supercharger application. I completely agreed that the supercharger uses the engine tranny and belts to speed their impeller thereby wasting potential useful power. I suppose what "efficient" to one industry might not necessary "efficient" to the other; especially if they are almost working conversly with each other. For example, in the turbojet engine, power is produced by pressurized and burned gases whereas the typical piston engine produces power via tranny system. A supercharger would be more efficient in the turbojet engine mainly because it addes further pressurized air to the already pressurized gas before it reaches the chamber. What uses to drive the impeller of the supercharger is the same power required to drive the intake fan thus not wasting any useful thrust. Each application has its own merit. The quantity in which we measured to classify the two depends on its application. Clearly there are pros and cons for both. For instance, the supercharger have the following benefits over the turbocharger:
1) the airflow is not heated (colder air better performance)
2) higher pressures possible
3) higher and more constant flow rates possible
4) the pressures can be more controlled. ( turbocharger works off of
exhaust gas so harder to control and optimise)
In summary, the quantity in which the pros outweighted the cons is what the end benefit. The verdict has spoken. Turbo is more favourable.
Well, seriously I didn't know that there were previous discussions on this issue. The point that I am trying to comprehend here is the feasibility of the supercharger application. I completely agreed that the supercharger uses the engine tranny and belts to speed their impeller thereby wasting potential useful power. I suppose what "efficient" to one industry might not necessary "efficient" to the other; especially if they are almost working conversly with each other. For example, in the turbojet engine, power is produced by pressurized and burned gases whereas the typical piston engine produces power via tranny system. A supercharger would be more efficient in the turbojet engine mainly because it addes further pressurized air to the already pressurized gas before it reaches the chamber. What uses to drive the impeller of the supercharger is the same power required to drive the intake fan thus not wasting any useful thrust. Each application has its own merit. The quantity in which we measured to classify the two depends on its application. Clearly there are pros and cons for both. For instance, the supercharger have the following benefits over the turbocharger:
1) the airflow is not heated (colder air better performance)
2) higher pressures possible
3) higher and more constant flow rates possible
4) the pressures can be more controlled. ( turbocharger works off of
exhaust gas so harder to control and optimise)
In summary, the quantity in which the pros outweighted the cons is what the end benefit. The verdict has spoken. Turbo is more favourable.
v_knot
02-05-2002, 02:14 PM
Supercharger VS.Turbocharger
Many people are confused about the differences between a super charger and turbocharger. Booth families of devices are basically air compressors, but they're operated' quite differently from each other. A supercharger is mechanically driven by the engine itself; usually off the crankshaft by a cogged belt andpulley system. This means that a supercharger uses up some of the engine's horsepower just to drive itself - often 60 horsepower or more! Fortunately, the airflow generated by the supercharger helps it produce far more horsepower than it requires to operate.
A turbocharger, however, is driven by the thermal energy of the exhaust
gases of the engine. With non-turbocharged vehicles, these gases are
simply discharged out of the engine as quickly and efficiently as possible, wasting a surprising amount of energy in the form of noise and heat. A turbocharger uses some of that energy (which would otherwise be wasted) to drive its compressor, without the attendant horsepower loss of a crankdriven system.
The result? The turbocharged engine stands to produce more peak horsepower than a comparable supercharged engine, mostly because the turbo does not require any power from the crankshaft. Also, the turbocharged engine will typically run much quieter than a supercharged engine since the turbo has no gears, belts or pulleys and because the turbo itself muffles the exhaust. And while many superchargers are large, heavy devices (we've all seen Roots-type blowers sticking up through the hoods of muscle cars), the turbocharger is a relatively small package - a turbo capable of producing 600 horsepower can weigh only 15 pounds and be easily held in one hand. It is for these reasons that turbocharging has become increasingly popular with both OE and aftermarket manufacturers. Automakers can produce lightweight vehicles with good fuel economy yet excellent power thanks to the turbo. The aftermarket manufacturers have jumped into the game, offering larger turbocharger "upgrades" in place of factory turbos, or even complete turbo "kits" to convert a naturally-aspirated vehicle to turbocharged configuration. (Eg. Subaru WRX is a perfect example of power to weight ratio)
The fundamentals are basically these:
* Exhaust must be routed to the turbine inlet of the turbocharger. This is
typically done with a turbo exhaust manifold, when available, or a custom adapter plate to allow you to mount the turbo to the factory exhaust manifold.
*Exhaust must be directed out of the turbine discharge of the
turbocharger. This can typically be done at a muffler shop, where a custom down-pipe will be fabricated, to connect the turbine discharge side of the turbo to the exhaust system.
*Air must be ducted from the air filter to the compressor inlet, and from
the compressor discharge to the intake manifold. This is typically done in aluminum or steel tubing which is then coupled at all joints by silicone hose couplings or nitrile rubber connectors. Flex hose is sometimes used on the inlet side of the compressor since it is only subjected to vacuum, not pressure. (Plumbing knowledge kicks in..)
*Pressurized oil must be fed to the turbocharger's bearings. The most
common place to tap into an oil galley is at the oil pressure sending unit.
*An oil drain line must be installed so that the oil used to lubricate the
turbocharger can drain back to the oil pan. This is typically done by
brazing a hose fitting to the pan and using a large diameter, oil-resistant hose from the bottom of the turbo to the side of the pan. The heart of the turbo system is of course, the turbocharger itself. The size and model of turbo that you require can vary radically depending on your application (i.e. street, track, drag). The larger turbochargers can produce tremendous amounts of power, but they will take longer to spool up (turbo lag). This is a function of the size of compressor and turbine wheels, as well as the turbine housing itself. A turbocharger applications specialist will be able to assist you in choosing the proper turbocharger for your car.
Disadvantages for turbochargers:
*With air being pumped into the cylinders under pressure by the
turbocharger, and then being further compressed by the piston, there is
more danger of knock. Knocking happens when you compress air, the temperature of the air increases. The temperature may increase enough to ignite the fuel before the spark plug fires.
*Turbo Lag. It takes a second for the turbine to get up to speed before
boost is produced. One way to decrease turbo is to reduce the inertia of
the rotating parts, mainly by reducing their weigh.
Many people are confused about the differences between a super charger and turbocharger. Booth families of devices are basically air compressors, but they're operated' quite differently from each other. A supercharger is mechanically driven by the engine itself; usually off the crankshaft by a cogged belt andpulley system. This means that a supercharger uses up some of the engine's horsepower just to drive itself - often 60 horsepower or more! Fortunately, the airflow generated by the supercharger helps it produce far more horsepower than it requires to operate.
A turbocharger, however, is driven by the thermal energy of the exhaust
gases of the engine. With non-turbocharged vehicles, these gases are
simply discharged out of the engine as quickly and efficiently as possible, wasting a surprising amount of energy in the form of noise and heat. A turbocharger uses some of that energy (which would otherwise be wasted) to drive its compressor, without the attendant horsepower loss of a crankdriven system.
The result? The turbocharged engine stands to produce more peak horsepower than a comparable supercharged engine, mostly because the turbo does not require any power from the crankshaft. Also, the turbocharged engine will typically run much quieter than a supercharged engine since the turbo has no gears, belts or pulleys and because the turbo itself muffles the exhaust. And while many superchargers are large, heavy devices (we've all seen Roots-type blowers sticking up through the hoods of muscle cars), the turbocharger is a relatively small package - a turbo capable of producing 600 horsepower can weigh only 15 pounds and be easily held in one hand. It is for these reasons that turbocharging has become increasingly popular with both OE and aftermarket manufacturers. Automakers can produce lightweight vehicles with good fuel economy yet excellent power thanks to the turbo. The aftermarket manufacturers have jumped into the game, offering larger turbocharger "upgrades" in place of factory turbos, or even complete turbo "kits" to convert a naturally-aspirated vehicle to turbocharged configuration. (Eg. Subaru WRX is a perfect example of power to weight ratio)
The fundamentals are basically these:
* Exhaust must be routed to the turbine inlet of the turbocharger. This is
typically done with a turbo exhaust manifold, when available, or a custom adapter plate to allow you to mount the turbo to the factory exhaust manifold.
*Exhaust must be directed out of the turbine discharge of the
turbocharger. This can typically be done at a muffler shop, where a custom down-pipe will be fabricated, to connect the turbine discharge side of the turbo to the exhaust system.
*Air must be ducted from the air filter to the compressor inlet, and from
the compressor discharge to the intake manifold. This is typically done in aluminum or steel tubing which is then coupled at all joints by silicone hose couplings or nitrile rubber connectors. Flex hose is sometimes used on the inlet side of the compressor since it is only subjected to vacuum, not pressure. (Plumbing knowledge kicks in..)
*Pressurized oil must be fed to the turbocharger's bearings. The most
common place to tap into an oil galley is at the oil pressure sending unit.
*An oil drain line must be installed so that the oil used to lubricate the
turbocharger can drain back to the oil pan. This is typically done by
brazing a hose fitting to the pan and using a large diameter, oil-resistant hose from the bottom of the turbo to the side of the pan. The heart of the turbo system is of course, the turbocharger itself. The size and model of turbo that you require can vary radically depending on your application (i.e. street, track, drag). The larger turbochargers can produce tremendous amounts of power, but they will take longer to spool up (turbo lag). This is a function of the size of compressor and turbine wheels, as well as the turbine housing itself. A turbocharger applications specialist will be able to assist you in choosing the proper turbocharger for your car.
Disadvantages for turbochargers:
*With air being pumped into the cylinders under pressure by the
turbocharger, and then being further compressed by the piston, there is
more danger of knock. Knocking happens when you compress air, the temperature of the air increases. The temperature may increase enough to ignite the fuel before the spark plug fires.
*Turbo Lag. It takes a second for the turbine to get up to speed before
boost is produced. One way to decrease turbo is to reduce the inertia of
the rotating parts, mainly by reducing their weigh.
b-b00gie
02-05-2002, 02:20 PM
So I guess you're starting to believe me? :)
G-Forces
02-05-2002, 02:43 PM
Originally posted by v_knot
For instance, the supercharger have the following benefits over the turbocharger:
1) the airflow is not heated (colder air better performance)
2) higher pressures possible
3) higher and more constant flow rates possible
4) the pressures can be more controlled. ( turbocharger works off of
exhaust gas so harder to control and optimise)
1) This is incorrect. With the exception of the centrifugal supercharger (which basically uses a turbocharger turbine) the supercharges are much more inefficent in compressing the air. And will create a hotter charge at comparable boost levels.
2) I don't think that is correct either.
3) Sounds like you got this backwards too.
4) That's where a good wastegate comes into play. ;)
Most of those points sound backwards. I'd like to hear your rationale behind 2 and 3.
For instance, the supercharger have the following benefits over the turbocharger:
1) the airflow is not heated (colder air better performance)
2) higher pressures possible
3) higher and more constant flow rates possible
4) the pressures can be more controlled. ( turbocharger works off of
exhaust gas so harder to control and optimise)
1) This is incorrect. With the exception of the centrifugal supercharger (which basically uses a turbocharger turbine) the supercharges are much more inefficent in compressing the air. And will create a hotter charge at comparable boost levels.
2) I don't think that is correct either.
3) Sounds like you got this backwards too.
4) That's where a good wastegate comes into play. ;)
Most of those points sound backwards. I'd like to hear your rationale behind 2 and 3.
jasestu
02-05-2002, 02:55 PM
Hmmm, methinks someone needs to collate all these threads on superchargers vs turbochargers and put something in the FAQ section...
I think it's generally accepted that turbos are the most viable option, but I'd still like to try the supercharger thing oneday, just simply becuase it's different. :)
I think it's generally accepted that turbos are the most viable option, but I'd still like to try the supercharger thing oneday, just simply becuase it's different. :)
b-b00gie
02-05-2002, 03:03 PM
Originally posted by G-Forces
1) This is incorrect. With the exception of the centrifugal supercharger (which basically uses a turbocharger turbine) the supercharges are much more inefficent in compressing the air. And will create a hotter charge at comparable boost levels.
2) I don't think that is correct either.
3) Sounds like you got this backwards too.
4) That's where a good wastegate comes into play. ;)
Most of those points sound backwards. I'd like to hear your rationale behind 2 and 3.
Jason this goes back to what I was saying about supercharger manufacturers making false claims...
:frog:
1) This is incorrect. With the exception of the centrifugal supercharger (which basically uses a turbocharger turbine) the supercharges are much more inefficent in compressing the air. And will create a hotter charge at comparable boost levels.
2) I don't think that is correct either.
3) Sounds like you got this backwards too.
4) That's where a good wastegate comes into play. ;)
Most of those points sound backwards. I'd like to hear your rationale behind 2 and 3.
Jason this goes back to what I was saying about supercharger manufacturers making false claims...
:frog:
jasestu
02-05-2002, 03:27 PM
Erm, just a thought, what would be need to be done with respect to keeping the ECU happy when adding a supercharger?
G-Forces
02-05-2002, 03:33 PM
Originally posted by jasestu
Erm, just a thought, what would be need to be done with respect to keeping the ECU happy when adding a supercharger?
Basically the same as adding a turbo.
Erm, just a thought, what would be need to be done with respect to keeping the ECU happy when adding a supercharger?
Basically the same as adding a turbo.
G22DET
02-05-2002, 04:46 PM
AGAIN!!??
ignor all these technical mumbo...go back to the basics and you'll know which system is efficient...and in terms of motor-engine engineering, efficiency=power
turbo uses wasted exhaust gas and converts it into power
supercharger uses a pulley (which uses part of the power that the engine produce to turn) to create power..
its almost like saying which recycle bin would you use...the one that recycles 'trash' and make a nice sheet of paper out of it or use the one that takes a nice sheet of paper and recycles the nice sheet of paper into another nice sheet of paper?
we should lock this thread before someone gets hurt....or before george comes in....
ignor all these technical mumbo...go back to the basics and you'll know which system is efficient...and in terms of motor-engine engineering, efficiency=power
turbo uses wasted exhaust gas and converts it into power
supercharger uses a pulley (which uses part of the power that the engine produce to turn) to create power..
its almost like saying which recycle bin would you use...the one that recycles 'trash' and make a nice sheet of paper out of it or use the one that takes a nice sheet of paper and recycles the nice sheet of paper into another nice sheet of paper?
we should lock this thread before someone gets hurt....or before george comes in....
b-b00gie
02-05-2002, 04:51 PM
Originally posted by G22DET
or before george comes in....
Hehe.. it got beaten to death last time, I think George will pass it up this time. :p
or before george comes in....
Hehe.. it got beaten to death last time, I think George will pass it up this time. :p
TeamNissan
02-05-2002, 06:33 PM
Actually there isn't much to discuss!! Turbo rocks and beats the hell out of superchargers anytime............. There is NOTHING as wild as a 1.6 bar SR20DET engine :finger:
v_knot
02-06-2002, 07:22 AM
Originally posted by G-Forces
1) This is incorrect. With the exception of the centrifugal supercharger (which basically uses a turbocharger turbine) the supercharges are much more inefficent in compressing the air. And will create a hotter charge at comparable boost levels.
2) I don't think that is correct either.
3) Sounds like you got this backwards too.
4) That's where a good wastegate comes into play. ;)
Most of those points sound backwards. I'd like to hear your rationale behind 2 and 3.
hey people don't pick my nose! :silly2:
J, tell you the truth, my die-hearting friend who has a passion for supercharger gave me those info. Actually, my two roommates who are not convinced that turbo is the way to go in my car. I am here just to prove to them that they know "jack" all. The above message threw them somewhat off the chair!
1) This is incorrect. With the exception of the centrifugal supercharger (which basically uses a turbocharger turbine) the supercharges are much more inefficent in compressing the air. And will create a hotter charge at comparable boost levels.
2) I don't think that is correct either.
3) Sounds like you got this backwards too.
4) That's where a good wastegate comes into play. ;)
Most of those points sound backwards. I'd like to hear your rationale behind 2 and 3.
hey people don't pick my nose! :silly2:
J, tell you the truth, my die-hearting friend who has a passion for supercharger gave me those info. Actually, my two roommates who are not convinced that turbo is the way to go in my car. I am here just to prove to them that they know "jack" all. The above message threw them somewhat off the chair!
v_knot
02-06-2002, 07:23 AM
Originally posted by b-b00gie
So I guess you're starting to believe me? :)
There was never a doubt to begin with........:frog:
So I guess you're starting to believe me? :)
There was never a doubt to begin with........:frog:
G-Forces
02-06-2002, 10:20 AM
Originally posted by v_knot
hey people don't pick my nose! :silly2:
J, tell you the truth, my die-hearting friend who has a passion for supercharger gave me those info. Actually, my two roommates who are not convinced that turbo is the way to go in my car. I am here just to prove to them that they know "jack" all. The above message threw them somewhat off the chair!
LOL. OK guess you'll just have to step up to the plate and 'prove' them wrong. :D
hey people don't pick my nose! :silly2:
J, tell you the truth, my die-hearting friend who has a passion for supercharger gave me those info. Actually, my two roommates who are not convinced that turbo is the way to go in my car. I am here just to prove to them that they know "jack" all. The above message threw them somewhat off the chair!
LOL. OK guess you'll just have to step up to the plate and 'prove' them wrong. :D
P10DET
02-07-2002, 01:24 AM
Originally posted by v_knot
So availability is key here? I know a supercharger can put out a lot more hp and it is more efficient as well.
Dead wrong on both accounts.
DEAD WRONG
Read the SE-R Mailing List archive. Read the archives for this forum. Read Mike Kojima's Suck, Squish, Bang, Blow article - just for starters.
So availability is key here? I know a supercharger can put out a lot more hp and it is more efficient as well.
Dead wrong on both accounts.
DEAD WRONG
Read the SE-R Mailing List archive. Read the archives for this forum. Read Mike Kojima's Suck, Squish, Bang, Blow article - just for starters.
P10DET
02-07-2002, 01:29 AM
Originally posted by jasestu
I think it's generally accepted that turbos are the most viable option, but I'd still like to try the supercharger thing oneday, just simply becuase it's different. :)
Wearing ladies dresses would be different too. You're not going to do that are you? ;)
I think it's generally accepted that turbos are the most viable option, but I'd still like to try the supercharger thing oneday, just simply becuase it's different. :)
Wearing ladies dresses would be different too. You're not going to do that are you? ;)
P10DET
02-07-2002, 01:34 AM
Originally posted by v_knot
Disadvantages for turbochargers:
*With air being pumped into the cylinders under pressure by the
turbocharger, and then being further compressed by the piston,
What the fuck do you think a supercharger does?
Dude, I don't mean to flame, but you really need to learn more on this subject before making more embarassing statements.
There's a lot of misinformation out there, but if you read Mike Kojima's and Rob Cadle's writings on the subject, you can end up knowing more than some folks who make a living selling these things. They can get technical, but both are pretty good at keeping things simple most of the time too.
Disadvantages for turbochargers:
*With air being pumped into the cylinders under pressure by the
turbocharger, and then being further compressed by the piston,
What the fuck do you think a supercharger does?
Dude, I don't mean to flame, but you really need to learn more on this subject before making more embarassing statements.
There's a lot of misinformation out there, but if you read Mike Kojima's and Rob Cadle's writings on the subject, you can end up knowing more than some folks who make a living selling these things. They can get technical, but both are pretty good at keeping things simple most of the time too.
P10DET
02-07-2002, 01:38 AM
Originally posted by G22DET
AGAIN!!??
ignor all these technical mumbo...go back to the basics and you'll know which system is efficient...and in terms of motor-engine engineering, efficiency=power
turbo uses wasted exhaust gas and converts it into power
supercharger uses a pulley (which uses part of the power that the engine produce to turn) to create power
Actually, when talking about SC and turbo efficiency, what the real discussion is about is compressing the air while inducing the least amount of heat.
IOW, at the same air flow rate (whether SC or turbo), the more efficient compressor will pump out lower temp air.
But, Luke's point about turbos not consuming power is not a small point either. It just doesn't figure into the efficiency question.
AGAIN!!??
ignor all these technical mumbo...go back to the basics and you'll know which system is efficient...and in terms of motor-engine engineering, efficiency=power
turbo uses wasted exhaust gas and converts it into power
supercharger uses a pulley (which uses part of the power that the engine produce to turn) to create power
Actually, when talking about SC and turbo efficiency, what the real discussion is about is compressing the air while inducing the least amount of heat.
IOW, at the same air flow rate (whether SC or turbo), the more efficient compressor will pump out lower temp air.
But, Luke's point about turbos not consuming power is not a small point either. It just doesn't figure into the efficiency question.
P10DET
02-07-2002, 01:39 AM
Originally posted by G22DET
we should lock this thread before someone gets hurt....or before george comes in....
Too late. :D
we should lock this thread before someone gets hurt....or before george comes in....
Too late. :D
P10DET
02-07-2002, 01:41 AM
Originally posted by b-b00gie
Hehe.. it got beaten to death last time, I think George will pass it up this time. :p
Wrong.
No sense letting such severe misinformation get repeated without the true story at least being told.
Hehe.. it got beaten to death last time, I think George will pass it up this time. :p
Wrong.
No sense letting such severe misinformation get repeated without the true story at least being told.
P10DET
02-07-2002, 01:42 AM
Originally posted by v_knot
J, tell you the truth, my die-hearting friend who has a passion for supercharger gave me those info. Actually, my two roommates who are not convinced that turbo is the way to go in my car. I am here just to prove to them that they know "jack" all. The above message threw them somewhat off the chair!
So now you know......
Don't listen to them.
They don't happen to be eating bananas do they? :right:
J, tell you the truth, my die-hearting friend who has a passion for supercharger gave me those info. Actually, my two roommates who are not convinced that turbo is the way to go in my car. I am here just to prove to them that they know "jack" all. The above message threw them somewhat off the chair!
So now you know......
Don't listen to them.
They don't happen to be eating bananas do they? :right:
TeamNissan
02-07-2002, 03:38 AM
And that ladies and gentle men was George!!*LOL* :D
Any questions!? ;)
Any questions!? ;)
v_knot
02-07-2002, 08:18 AM
Originally posted by P10DET
What the fuck do you think a supercharger does?
Dude, I don't mean to flame, but you really need to learn more on this subject before making more embarassing statements.
There's a lot of misinformation out there, but if you read Mike Kojima's and Rob Cadle's writings on the subject, you can end up knowing more than some folks who make a living selling these things. They can get technical, but both are pretty good at keeping things simple most of the time too.
George, no pun intended here, but who the f**k is Mike and Rob? They might be the Turbo guru but how is that making them any better than others? As for technical, I can confidently say that I am most qualified in this forum than anyone could ever dreamed of becoming one.
I admit I do not fully comprehend the full FUNCTIONALITIES of each application to bring up the discussion. I am learning here, but bare with me, that these messages were the excerpts taken from some technical articles so no need to throw spears at me.
What the fuck do you think a supercharger does?
Dude, I don't mean to flame, but you really need to learn more on this subject before making more embarassing statements.
There's a lot of misinformation out there, but if you read Mike Kojima's and Rob Cadle's writings on the subject, you can end up knowing more than some folks who make a living selling these things. They can get technical, but both are pretty good at keeping things simple most of the time too.
George, no pun intended here, but who the f**k is Mike and Rob? They might be the Turbo guru but how is that making them any better than others? As for technical, I can confidently say that I am most qualified in this forum than anyone could ever dreamed of becoming one.
I admit I do not fully comprehend the full FUNCTIONALITIES of each application to bring up the discussion. I am learning here, but bare with me, that these messages were the excerpts taken from some technical articles so no need to throw spears at me.
P10DET
02-07-2002, 08:41 AM
Originally posted by v_knot
George, no pun intended here, but who the f**k is Mike and Rob? They might be the Turbo guru but how is that making them any better than others?
Well, let's see......
Rob Cadle is an engineer for Garrett. He works with this stuff every day to make a living (works with SCs too).
Mike Kojima is an engineer for Nissan. He used to build TRDs race engines for Toyota's IMSA GTP program. He's a consultant to the aftermarket performance industry. He's also personally responsible for some of the most developed, high powered SR20s in North America.
Originally posted by v_knot
As for technical, I can confidently say that I am most qualified in this forum than anyone could ever dreamed of becoming one.
Obviously not. You have way too many things dead wrong.
Originally posted by v_knot
I admit I do not fully comprehend the full FUNCTIONALITIES of each application to bring up the discussion. I am learning here, but bare with me, that these messages were the excerpts taken from some technical articles so no need to throw spears at me.
Sorry, but you're saying a lot of wrong things and trying to back it up with a lot of other wrong things. People were trying to help you out and you were having none of it.
I'll say again, you should read some of the things I suggested.
George, no pun intended here, but who the f**k is Mike and Rob? They might be the Turbo guru but how is that making them any better than others?
Well, let's see......
Rob Cadle is an engineer for Garrett. He works with this stuff every day to make a living (works with SCs too).
Mike Kojima is an engineer for Nissan. He used to build TRDs race engines for Toyota's IMSA GTP program. He's a consultant to the aftermarket performance industry. He's also personally responsible for some of the most developed, high powered SR20s in North America.
Originally posted by v_knot
As for technical, I can confidently say that I am most qualified in this forum than anyone could ever dreamed of becoming one.
Obviously not. You have way too many things dead wrong.
Originally posted by v_knot
I admit I do not fully comprehend the full FUNCTIONALITIES of each application to bring up the discussion. I am learning here, but bare with me, that these messages were the excerpts taken from some technical articles so no need to throw spears at me.
Sorry, but you're saying a lot of wrong things and trying to back it up with a lot of other wrong things. People were trying to help you out and you were having none of it.
I'll say again, you should read some of the things I suggested.
b-b00gie
02-07-2002, 08:46 AM
Originally posted by v_knot
As for technical, I can confidently say that I am most qualified in this forum than anyone could ever dreamed of becoming one.
I take that as a big insult not only to myself but everyone else here too. You think that you are more qualified or intelligent because of your studies?
I can tell you that college degrees and studies do NOT make you qualified for anything. Years of industry experience is what merits qualification.
As for technical, I can confidently say that I am most qualified in this forum than anyone could ever dreamed of becoming one.
I take that as a big insult not only to myself but everyone else here too. You think that you are more qualified or intelligent because of your studies?
I can tell you that college degrees and studies do NOT make you qualified for anything. Years of industry experience is what merits qualification.
v_knot
02-07-2002, 09:48 AM
Originally posted by P10DET
Well, let's see......
Rob Cadle is an engineer for Garrett. He works with this stuff every day to make a living (works with SCs too).
Mike Kojima is an engineer for Nissan. He used to build TRDs race engines for Toyota's IMSA GTP program. He's a consultant to the aftermarket performance industry. He's also personally responsible for some of the most developed, high powered SR20s in North America.
This is always nice to know....
Originally posted by P10DET
I'll say again, you should read some of the things I suggested.
Thanks for the tips.
Well, let's see......
Rob Cadle is an engineer for Garrett. He works with this stuff every day to make a living (works with SCs too).
Mike Kojima is an engineer for Nissan. He used to build TRDs race engines for Toyota's IMSA GTP program. He's a consultant to the aftermarket performance industry. He's also personally responsible for some of the most developed, high powered SR20s in North America.
This is always nice to know....
Originally posted by P10DET
I'll say again, you should read some of the things I suggested.
Thanks for the tips.
v_knot
02-07-2002, 10:12 AM
Originally posted by b-b00gie
I take that as a big insult not only to myself but everyone else here too. You think that you are more qualified or intelligent because of your studies?
Should not be offended. I can be qualified for certain things but I can also be a dumbass for many things. For fuck sake I can't even put a Turbo together!!!:p Intelligence is irrelevant.
Originally posted by b-b00gie
I can tell you that college degrees and studies do NOT make you qualified for anything. Years of industry experience is what merits qualification.
Concur but debatable. I'll leave it up to your speculations.
I take that as a big insult not only to myself but everyone else here too. You think that you are more qualified or intelligent because of your studies?
Should not be offended. I can be qualified for certain things but I can also be a dumbass for many things. For fuck sake I can't even put a Turbo together!!!:p Intelligence is irrelevant.
Originally posted by b-b00gie
I can tell you that college degrees and studies do NOT make you qualified for anything. Years of industry experience is what merits qualification.
Concur but debatable. I'll leave it up to your speculations.
v_knot
02-07-2002, 10:29 AM
Anyway, this thread should be deleted and assign an R.I.P.
Thanks for all the positive and negative insights.
Thanks for all the positive and negative insights.
G-Forces
02-07-2002, 03:03 PM
Nahh we don't delete things here at AF. It will eventually make it's way into the depths of the posts to be dug out again sometime in the future in someone's random search. ;)
AznVirus
02-07-2002, 09:22 PM
phew the wars over :greenchai
personally id go for a turbo since it has more availability over the SC, but if you want to be different then be my guest and try to pop one of those suckers on there. :D
personally id go for a turbo since it has more availability over the SC, but if you want to be different then be my guest and try to pop one of those suckers on there. :D
TeamNissan
02-08-2002, 04:21 AM
We have made a GA16 engine with SC
As you kan see on the dyne it worked just fine! (NOT saying better than Turbo ;) )
http://files.automotiveforums.com/uploads/366844SunnySRkompressor.jpg
As you kan see on the dyne it worked just fine! (NOT saying better than Turbo ;) )
http://files.automotiveforums.com/uploads/366844SunnySRkompressor.jpg
G-Forces
02-08-2002, 10:20 AM
Originally posted by TeamNissan
We have made a GA16 engine with SC
As you kan see on the dyne it worked just fine! (NOT saying better than Turbo ;) )
I don't think anyone said it wouldn't work. ;)
We have made a GA16 engine with SC
As you kan see on the dyne it worked just fine! (NOT saying better than Turbo ;) )
I don't think anyone said it wouldn't work. ;)
TeamNissan
02-08-2002, 10:28 AM
Originally posted by G-Forces
I don't think anyone said it wouldn't work. ;)
NO NO NO NO didn't accuse anyone for saying that, just saying that it is a cheaper (here in Denmark) and less constructive rebuild! :-)
Because here in Denmark we have to go to periodic MOT test every second year and it is quite a work to take out a complete turbo system instead of just some pipes and a SC!
I don't think anyone said it wouldn't work. ;)
NO NO NO NO didn't accuse anyone for saying that, just saying that it is a cheaper (here in Denmark) and less constructive rebuild! :-)
Because here in Denmark we have to go to periodic MOT test every second year and it is quite a work to take out a complete turbo system instead of just some pipes and a SC!
jasestu
02-09-2002, 04:09 PM
Originally posted by P10DET
Wearing ladies dresses would be different too. You're not going to do that are you? ;)
Well that was a pointless and unnecessary comment.
You sure do get all wound up over turbos don't ya? (pun intended)... ;)
Wearing ladies dresses would be different too. You're not going to do that are you? ;)
Well that was a pointless and unnecessary comment.
You sure do get all wound up over turbos don't ya? (pun intended)... ;)
P10DET
02-11-2002, 12:28 AM
Originally posted by jasestu
Well that was a pointless and unnecessary comment.
You sure do get all wound up over turbos don't ya? (pun intended)... ;)
Oh bloody hell..... Chill out. Didn't you see the ;) ?
If you don't like the fact that I tried to have a little fun with the thread, get a grip. I'm probably more on-topic than most and try to help people a lot. Cut me a little break, eh?
Well that was a pointless and unnecessary comment.
You sure do get all wound up over turbos don't ya? (pun intended)... ;)
Oh bloody hell..... Chill out. Didn't you see the ;) ?
If you don't like the fact that I tried to have a little fun with the thread, get a grip. I'm probably more on-topic than most and try to help people a lot. Cut me a little break, eh?
Automotive Network, Inc., Copyright ©2026