|
| Search | Car Forums | Gallery | Articles | Helper | Air Dried Fresh Beef Dog Food | IgorSushko.com | Corporate |
|
|||||||
| '88 - '91 Civic | CRX | Wagon | Shuttlee Partnership with: LadyNRedSi.com |
| View Poll Results: best for increaseing hp and ft/lbs | |||
| Turbo |
   
|
10 | 43.48% |
| Supercharged |
  
|
2 | 8.70% |
| Naturally Asperated |
  
|
3 | 13.04% |
| Gerbals On Wheels |
  
|
8 | 34.78% |
| Voters: 23. You may not vote on this poll | |||
 |
 Show Printable Version | 
Subscribe to this Thread
|
|
|
Thread Tools |
|
#1
10-07-2003, 10:39 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
turbo vs. supercharge for b16a1
hey i don't have a b16 yet, but i am planning on it and my friend keeps pressuring me to go turbo but i'm thinkin of more supercharged, i hear it has better low end torque but can cause problems at high altitude. and i'm hearing that turbos can be unreliable and the guages kinda intimidate me. So what are the pros and cons of each and which would you think would be best for street racing, non drag, i dislike drag.
__________________
I'm no street racer nor do want to be, my goal is a fun car... that leaves SUVs in the dust. current car: red 90-civic-STD-hb with dx trannie, ecu, shift knob, & rear seats. i hate my vynil seats. p.s. i am once again with computer, please forgive the one year leave of absence. 
|
|
#3
10-07-2003, 11:24 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
then post the vote, the gerbal is winning man.
__________________
I'm no street racer nor do want to be, my goal is a fun car... that leaves SUVs in the dust. current car: red 90-civic-STD-hb with dx trannie, ecu, shift knob, & rear seats. i hate my vynil seats. p.s. i am once again with computer, please forgive the one year leave of absence.
|
|
#4
10-07-2003, 11:55 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
getting a Supercharger for a b16 is difficult since there is no kit for the 1 or 2nd gen B16a only the 99-00. you can retrofit a JRSC of a Type-R but it requires alot of time and effort along with $$$.
I personaly am going the turbo route... less expensive, easier to get, potential for more power, and a BOV. personal desision... I am going turbo ! Kun
__________________
2012 VW Golf 3 Door Automatic (Company Car)  2011 VW Golf Wagon 5 speed (Company Car) 2010 VW Jetta 2.5 Automatic (Company Car) 2009 VW City Jetta 5 Speed (Company Car) 2009 VW GLI 6 Speed (Company Car) 2008 VW Jetta 2.0T 6speed (Company Car) 1999.5 Audi A4 Quattro Sport 1.8t (Chipped 1.0 bar) Sold 1990 CRX Si (Built B17a) - Stripped and Crushed 1988 CRX Si -- Stolen 1990 Civic Cx -- Sold 1990 Civic Si -- Parted 1989 Civic dx -- Sold
|
|
#5
10-08-2003, 02:11 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: turbo vs. supercharge for b16a1
Quote:
If they made more whp and were more reliable why do all the pro honda teams use big ass turbo's? I meen hell, they must not have figured it out by now! 
__________________
White folk eat noodles too. 
|
|
#7
10-08-2003, 10:28 AM
|
||||
|
||||
|
If you want more HP and torque, turbo is the way to go.
|
|
#8
10-08-2003, 03:33 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
NA for me, more respect for me to build high-HP ultra fast on reg parts than just slapping some turbos on it.
__________________
Name: Scott Stable Of Cars I have Owned: 1991 Honda CRX 1990 Oldsmobile Cutlass Supreme 2003 Honda Accord 1998 Chrysler Concorde 2007 Honda Civic 1997 Toyota Camry 1995 Saturn SC2 1996 Ford Taurus 1991 GMC Sierra 2002 Daewoo Leganza 1999 Dodge Ram 2007 Honda CR-V 2003 BMW 325i
|
|
#9
10-08-2003, 03:51 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Re: turbo vs. supercharge for b16a1
Quote:
they use big ass turbos cause they have the GREEN to spend every time the blow
__________________
KoRnSaQ
|
|
#10
10-08-2003, 04:39 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: turbo vs. supercharge for b16a1
Quote:
|
|
#11
10-08-2003, 05:06 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Re: Re: turbo vs. supercharge for b16a1
Quote:
If your talking about the motor, I am realy going to laugh my ass off because a blower puts way more stress on a motor than a turbo does. Not to mention, when was the last time you saw a roots blower with an intercooler? Can you say detonation? Not to mention, blowers have a tendancy to come apart at the seams at high rpm's (Which is why non of the pro honda teams use them) and on top of all that, if you are going to be a moron and boost the shit out of a stock motor then you get what you have coming.
__________________
White folk eat noodles too.
|
|
#12
10-08-2003, 05:13 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
Also, most racers use turbos becuase the kits that come for hondas can only be set at 6 or 9 psi, and you can only change that boost level by upgrading the pulley. top drag racers usually boost a hell of a lot more boost than 9psi, so a turbo is logically more practical.
|
|
#13
10-08-2003, 05:38 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: turbo vs. supercharge for b16a1
Quote:
|
|
#14
10-08-2003, 05:40 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
actually since a turbo is causing back pressure before it spools, it is putting a load on the engine as well.
|
|
#15
10-08-2003, 09:56 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
- i hear that turbos put stress on the engine mainly when you start from idle cause it hasn't had time to build up compression but the superchargers offer slightly better response because the run of a belt (mind you no one can tell cause it's so miniscule it can't be detected by humans) but they offer better response off the line.
- also more reliable for everyday driver which i will be using it for. p.s. more info about turbos, and what's the deal w/ turbo almost running even w/ the gerbal?
__________________
I'm no street racer nor do want to be, my goal is a fun car... that leaves SUVs in the dust. current car: red 90-civic-STD-hb with dx trannie, ecu, shift knob, & rear seats. i hate my vynil seats. p.s. i am once again with computer, please forgive the one year leave of absence.
|
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
POST REPLY TO THIS THREAD |
 |
|
|
