Which is better? Si Turboed or Si Vortech Supercharged?

[Griffith 500]

Here's the old s/c vs. turbo saga again....

One myth that just doesn't seem to go away is that superchargers are for low end power and turbos for high end. That used to be true a few years ago when turbos were big and had lousy responsiveness. Today, it's the contrary really.

I used to have a Golf VR6 with the Vortech supercharger. Even though it was fun to drive with, the supercharger ate all your power below 3000 rpm. Only after that point it started to pull. But all in all it was not spectacular at all. Also, take those hp numbers with a grain of salt. I'm pretty convinced that you don't get more than 80 additional hp out of a Vortech unit. And if you're susceptible to noise, don't go for it. The Vortech unit can be extremely loud, especially at tickover, since it doesn't have a clutch. I had to exchange mine 3 times until I got one with acceptable noise levels.

Modern turbos produce masses of torque from very low revs. I have an Audi S4 Avant that reaches maximum torque a 1850 rpm. Lag goes almost unnoticed but that is also due to the biturbo setup with two very small chargers.

If you are looking for a bolt-on conversion, the supercharger is the easy way to do it. With a turbo, you have to modify your engine a bit more; e.g. lowering compression and so on...).

But remember, if you add a supercharger it will feel as if you have added some cubic inches to your engine; power delivery is linear and unspectacular.
With a turbo you get that "vroomm" feeling, much more fun, but a bit less responsive due to minimal lag.

[JD@af]

I don't know why I, like most, get sucked into the myth, as Griffith described above, especially when I know first-hand that it is often untrue. The classic dynamics of super versus turbo don't hold up, although in some cases they still have relevance. Saab turbos (even current models) that I have experienced still have turbo lag issues up the wazoo. And roots blowers, while they do rob torque at just about baseline rpms, produce elevated torque at all rpms above this (sub 3,000). Your best bet is to compare them on a case by case basis to decide which is better for your application.

[enzo@af]

I've heard Porsche turbo's suffer from boost too.

[Brice]

TURBO!!!! So much more potential and plus the Vortech SC is one expensive ass bitch. You'd end up spending a bit more for a turbo and you'd get much better results. But of course, that's speed-wise. If you are looking to do autocrossing and stuff like that, you're going to need the low end power of the Vortech.

I'm going with TURBO though!!!

[VTEC_boi]

Turbos are more effiecent.

Effiency ownz j00

'nuff said

[JD@af]

Originally posted by VTEC_boi
Turbos are more effiecent.

Effiency ownz j00

'nuff said

True. However, the newest Roots blowers from Eaton truly challenge the conventional turbocharger if you want to look at just efficiency. Most judgments of the Roots blowers are based upon the 2nd and 3rd gen blowers. The 4th gen. blowers (name change from the M62 to the MP62) represents a 7% increase in efficiency, and the 5th gen. blowers represent an additional 7% increase in efficiency over the 4th gen. units. Now, does this mean that they will be able to match a turbo in high end power and boostability? No. But with this level of efficiency, I don't think that there is a turbo on the market today that can match the 5th gen.'s level of efficiency.

[kidrocket]

jesus learn to spell

[JD@af]

Originally posted by kidrocket
jesus learn to spell

Care to elabortate on that remark?