Before I buy.....

[Broke_as_****]

I say screw all that and just drop a helicopter turbine in the car.

500+hp and 700+lbs of torque from dead start all the way to 50,000+ rpm redline. Imagine only needing one gear

[MikeMan]

Apologies in advance for this huge post.

Originally Posted by longlivetheZ

Few things in there don't make much sense. You say in the beginning that you don't think the VG30E doesn't seem like the best for getting power out of, but then later on in the post you say how you wanted to upgrade your VG30E with cams and whatnot. Thought you didn't like the VG30E...

Its not that I hated them, I just didn't think they were the best engine to start modding considering there were engines out there with a better power-to-displacement (like the VG30DE).

Your disliking of turbos is odd. Turbos are the single most effective power adder that can be done to an engine...better than nitrous, better than a supercharger, better than displacement, better than stroking the engine, anything...turbos are the best way to make a powerful engine. Read the "turbo vs. supercharger" thread in the Forced Induction section of the Cars in General forum.

Yes they are effective at adding power. They do it very well, but having a lot of power doesn't really mean as much as most people think. The torque curve is a better measure of an engine's performance, but there are still other issues, such as how available that torque is at any given moment.

An increase of displacement means that that torque is always available. At any given rpm range, at WOT, thats exactly how much torque you're going to have. Turbos skew this torque curve by bringing a third dimension into the graph; intake pressure. Because the intake pressure of a turboed engine cannot be directly derived from the rpm of the engine, you also have to factor in things like: how long you've been at WOT, how much exhaust the engine has expelled, the rpm the engine has been running at and how quickly this rpm is increasing (due to load on the engine etc.)

Supercharging in theory is a direct analogue of increasing displacement. Ideally a supercharger will maintain a constant intake pressure, thereby literally raising the torque curve up. Of course there are issues such as frictional torque losses, increase of intake heat and so on. However, these issues can be overcome.

Forgetting that the main reason i can't have turbos is due to a lack of space in my engine bay, I would still rather supercharge my engine as it gives me this torque on tap. At any given rpm I can stamp on the pedal and the point on the torque curve that corrosponds to my rpm is at my wheels NOW.

Lets form an example. I'm going down a hill, engine braking, and suddenly a little riced up hyundai screams past me. Not wanting the 3 topless girls in my car thinking I'm any less of a man, I feel the urge to show this punk some real car. I slam my foot down on the pedal.

Turbo car: Because I've had a high RPM but no real exhaust (due to almost no intake air passing into the engine) the turbo's aren't spooled. The turbos take a second or 2 to spool up, making that beautiful whine that makes the hyundai driver start to shit his pants. The power comes on soon after.

Supercharged car: The wheels instantly start screeching. Because the rotational speed (and hence intake pressure at WOT) from the supercharger is directly proportional to the engine's RPM (whether I've previously had closed throttle, or WOT), that power is at my wheels NOW. The hyundai looks in his rear view mirror, and sees my car sideways producing a very nice tyre smoke cloud. All the topless girls start getting it on. The hyundai driver crashes into a telegraph pole because he was checking my sideways action in his rear view mirror too long.

This example wasn't to try and prove to anyone that turbos are shit, or that superchargers are better in every circumstance, but that in some instances, superchargers are better than turbos, contrary to what most people seem to believe.

Its just personal preference, but I prefer the the advantages and shortcomings of superchargers over that of turbochargers.

Besides, 3 topless girls getting it on in my car, how could I resist?

-Mike

[RX_speed]

^ I love the way this guy explains things

P.S. You still have telegraph poles where you live?

[Pistolpete]

hey mike man those last few comments have made a shit day i little better

the turbo VS supersharger debate has raged for a long while. perdonally i love the feel and sound etc... of turbos. However superchargers definatly have their advantages.
it comes down to personal preference i think.

[DeleriousZ]

yeah that's all fine and dandy... why not put both on? other than lack of space, there shouldn't be a reason why you can't do it, of course you might overspin the supercharger at high rpm's, but there are ways around this... it'd take some crazy plumbing work and quite a bit of engine bay space, but i'm sure it can be done, it has been done before, just not on a ZX to my knowledge

[longlivetheZ]

I've seen S/C + Turbo jobs...the one I saw was built by a rocket scientist...that should tell you something about the practicality of this. It's pointless.

I don't have the time to read that whole post right now, but I think I got the jist of it. I think you're basically saying that you prefer S/Cs because they don't have lag, right? That's all fine and whatnot, but what you don't realize is that a well designed turbo system can/will have VERY little to NO lag at ALL. I've actually seen one turbo'd car that made boost at idle! Turbos are very versatile and give you many more options than S/Cs. This results in turbos having the ability to be designed and set up for any application and purpose. A well designed and executed turbo system (system...not just a big turbo slapped onto an engine...a SYSTEM...everything being considered...intercooler, the turbo itself, fuel system, ignition system, all piping, exhaust system, etc all working together...) will always be a superior option to using a belt or gear driven supercharger.

Read the artical "Turbos vs. Superchargers" in the Forced Induction section of the Cars in General forum...you'll never think about using a S/C again.

[Broke_as_****]

Just read the article mentitioned above and thats some good info. Turbos have been called pretty much the closest thing ever to free horsepower and its true because you're not making more power, you're just taking wasted power and putting it to use. And as shown with even off the shelf components (Like JWT 530BBs ) you can setup a turbo system to have virtually no lag. An optimized exhaust system and quick spooling turbos will make boost almost immediately. And you don't have to be making 20 psi to have power. Even just 5 psi will add plenty of power and feed the turbos even faster.

I enjoyed the tire section at the end too. I've known that size and even compound is not directly proportional to traction (as LSDs are not traction multipliers in the huge sense that most people think they are). Nice to finally see the math behind that though.

[MikeMan]

Originally Posted by longlivetheZ

will always be a superior option to using a belt or gear driven supercharger.

Superior in what respect? Superchargers are superior at delivering what I personally want in my engine. Again, as I have said before its all personal preference. I've driven turbo cars and supercharged cars and I know what I like.

I'm not saying that you're shit, or that turbos are shit, so stop acting so defensive. You aren't going to change my opinion.

-Mike

[xsonik]

I am actually thinking about buying a z32, then tuning it in my garage for a year or so. I might wait a year just so insurance is slightly less. I have read though, this is a really reliable car. =] Hopefully I won't have to change that many parts.

[longlivetheZ]

Originally Posted by MikeMan

Superior in what respect? Superchargers are superior at delivering what I personally want in my engine. Again, as I have said before its all personal preference. I've driven turbo cars and supercharged cars and I know what I like.

I'm not saying that you're shit, or that turbos are shit, so stop acting so defensive. You aren't going to change my opinion.

-Mike

A turbo is a very versitile option...it can be set up for anything you want. This is why I say it's superior. It's better in many ways...you usually get better gas mileage, it's easier to change the boost, it's more efficient, it takes less power away from the engine, etc, and a well designed turbo system will have very little to no lag at all...just like a S/C...why would anyone want a S/C?

[RX_speed]

i prefer turbos too but you have to look at things from other perspectives too. Maybe a SC would be sufficient enough for the type of driving one wants to do, and building a properly designed turbo set up of the performance may be out of that person's price range.