turbo vs. super charged

[rice(er)]

i've been pondering around the af forums and even went to howstuffworks.com, but still.....they didn't put it in "dummies" terms so i could comprehend, im a little unsure how turbo is compared to super-charged? can someone put it in more simple terms? like what are the negatives and positives of each? which one would be best? provide more hp? which is more efficient? more reliable? etc.......thank you, mods feel free to close this if it's too "noobie" :'(

[$upraman]

Ok. Well, a turbo is driven by the engines exhaust gas and a supercharger is driven directly by the engines crankshaft via a belt, chain, or gears...if you didn't already know that.

As for operating speeds.... turbos often spin in excess of 100,000 rpm and are actually really made to withstand speeds of 150,000 rpm and sometimes much higher than that. In contrast, a supercharger will spin much slower, usually in the range of 10,000 to 15,000 rpm.

Advantages vs Disadvantages....I guess you could say that a turbo is much more sensitive and prone to failure simply because of its extremely high operating speed and that it is working in extremely high temperatures because of the cars exhaust. And lubrication is CRITICAL at speeds like that. You will also experience "turbo lag" with a turbo because it takes a little time for the driving exhaust force to allow for boost to be genererated.

A supercharger, unlike a turbo, can have quite a considerable load on the engine. I believe that some Ford superchargers will have a mere 1/2 H.P. load at highway cruising speeds but around a 60 H.P. load at 5000 rpm. What a supercharger has over a turbo though, is exceptional low-end torque and no lag.

[Schister66]

a supercharger is going to give you steady power through all rpm ranges while a turbo is really for high end power.

There really isn't an outright better way, it really depends on what you're going to use it for. If you're driving around and just want more power.....go w/ the supercharger, but if you're doing high end pulls and racing (upper rpm range driving) then i would go w/ the turbo.

Also superchargers are more reliable (in most cases) and easier to install.

[Reed]

a turbo is a supercharger.
please search before posting. you will find enough threads on this to keep you reading for days (seriously DAYS) its been covered extensively.also read stickies at the top of the forum.

those two posts above arent entirely true.

please close this thread before it turns into "one of those"

[beyondloadedSE]

Originally Posted by Schister66

a supercharger is going to give you steady power through all rpm ranges while a turbo is really for high end power.

I have to disagree with this. A properly sized turbo will make just as much power under the curve or more than a supercharger and will have no lag. For example, the centrifugal vortech kit for the contour starts to make boost at about 4,500 rpms and doesnt reach peak boost until redline. The T-28 turbo kit for the contour makes full boost at 2,800 rpms and the T3/T4 makes full boost at about 3,500 rpms, both of which make higher peak numbers than the supercharger and certainly more power under the curve. If it was a roots or screw type supercharger, then the numbers would be closer.

There really isn't an outright better way, it really depends on what you're going to use it for. If you're driving around and just want more power.....go w/ the supercharger, but if you're doing high end pulls and racing (upper rpm range driving) then i would go w/ the turbo.

Again, I disagree. Because superchargers are being driven off the engine, they have a higher parastic loss. In my opinion, turbos can always make more power than superchargers. You can only make the pulley so small on a supercharger, where as with a turbo, you can just upgrade to a bigger turbo.

[Black Lotus]

Originally Posted by beyondloadedSE

In my opinion, turbos can always make more power than superchargers.

Hah!
You're not the only one.
Whenever a supercharged engine is allowed in a professional (lots of money at stake) racing class, the engineer (with more than two functioning brain cells) in charge of the project, will always opt for the turbocharger, if possible.
Supercharged classes in the top levels of dragracing are penalized for using turbos, IIRC. Altho' turbos may also be more difficult to deal with at the initial launch.
Turbos are the system of choice when the engine has to be efficient and powerful with a reasonably wide powerband. If you want a VERY fast ultra powerful street or roadrace car, you simply are not serious if you've picked a Rootes type, or a centrifugal blower.

[Schister66]

I was giving him an overview.....of course you can match a supercharger w/ a small turbo and say that it makes more power at a certain rpm, but if turbos were always so much better, then why do companies like Jackson Racing and Vortech exist??

There are too many variables to answer w/ a definite answer; however, if given the opportunity, i would opt for a turbo over a supercharger because of how easily you can upgrade and the many millions of combinations of set ups.

Turbos and superchargers both have there ups and downs

[Black Lotus]

Originally Posted by Schister66

I was giving him an overview.....of course you can match a supercharger w/ a small turbo and say that it makes more power at a certain rpm, but if turbos were always so much better, then why do companies like Jackson Racing and Vortech exist??

Actually the engine itself would hold the line on how much boost it could take. A turbo is more efficient than a Rootes type blower at about ANY RPM, in that it heats the air less, which means that the engine could tolerate more boost. Centrifugal, like Vortechs are completely out of the picture in the low and mid-range. They work only when the engine is at high RPMs, like at the dragstrip, or Bonneville. These would be suited to street use only if the engine is very large and the engines have excess power at low revs (for the chassis) anyway. Or the owner doesn't give a rats-ass about low and mid-range power..
I think Jackson/Vortech they sell good because they are reasonably priced and have kits for specific cars.
American muscle car magazines (where you see this stuff) love to hype any belt driven blower and are still largely in denial of turbos, fuel injection, reasonable gas mileage and anything with independant rear suspension .
They are IMO, about 40 years out of date and fading fast.
As an aside, my personal car, shown in my "Gallery" in this website acheives max boost of 18 PSI (1.25 bar) at 3,500 RPMs, and holds that to 7,400 revs.
Not a world beater, but it's pleasant to drive.
All this is just my opinion. I'll get down off the soapbox now......

[rice(er)]

thanks for the replies, i sorta get the disadvantages and advantages now.....

[nissanfanatic]

Theres a sticky about this very subject.

LameST ARgueMENT eVAr!!!1111