383 procharger or turbo.....

[gorgepr]

guys I'm thinking of building my lt1 to a 383 and I need your opinion plus the plus and cons of these options: an sts turbo charger, a front mount turbo, a procharger, or to run it on nitrous, its supposed to be a daily driver but I have another car so it would be a weekend driver. btw its an automoatic

[stieh2000]

If its a DD, I'd go with nitrous becuase there's no need for those extra few 100+ horses all the time.

[poormillionaire2]

I vote procharger.

Turbos are ok, they have their place, but they require a lot more tubing and plumbing. If you have the time and money, a turbo is ok, but they are a lot more work. I would rather get an STS turbo than a front-mount turbo just for that very fact.

Nitrous can be fun, but I think there are a lot more things to worry about with nitrous. You hear a lot more stories of nitrous killing a car than super/turbochargers. Purges do look kick-ass though. But you go have to incur the re-occuring cost of filling the bottle.

[lamehonda]

Are you looking for a fast road car or something to take to the strip on weekends? I would go supercharger for everyday, and nitrous for the strip.

Turbos can be awesome but require alot of work as previously mentioned.

[tripnips]

personally id say the sts turbo because nitrous as mentioned before can really screw your car up quick and the superchargers use a belt off of the engine to feed the air into the engine so it takes some power away to make power so its not quite as efficient as a turbo. the only thing is are you looking for low end power boost or high end because the turbos mainly feed more power to the high end and superchargers mainly feed the low end rpms power. but a downside to turbos is you have to route an oil line to it to keep the bearings lubricated and its a good idea to use full synthetic just to be safe, and you should also let the vehicle its going into idle for a few minutes after the turbos used so the oil can keep the bearings lubed while its cooling down because its a common problem for turbos to fail if you just turn the car off without letting it cool down. its really not a matter of what other people think as much as what you are looking for.

nitrous, pro-power anytime you need it
con-need to pay to fill it, really miffs the engine if you make a mistake

turbo, pro-lots of high end power, very efficient
con-need lots of plumbing, intercooler, wastegate, and a blowoff valve would be recommended, and the air can go back into the engine via the exhaust header(s) and blow the shite outta the engine

supercharger, pro-lots of low end power where most of the power really needs to be put
con-takes a little power from the engine to feed it more therefore not as efficient

these are my understandings and as i wish i knew everything about cars i know i dont so if i messed up on anything or forgot anything feel free to correct me/add onto what i said...

[gorgepr]

I like the rear mount turbo the best, because I have a broken buick that I made turbo so therefore I just need the pipes, intercooler, blow off, turbo timer, the turbo itself, and a few injectors that I already have, the nitrous option I trow it there just to add something but I think Ill go rear mount



thanks for your opinions

[MrPbody]

Turbos are more efficient, true enough. However, ProCharger is unique among superchargers and is nearly as efficient as a turbo and MORE effective.

At "Super Chevy" (an oxymoron, to be sure), they (the ProCharger "people") had a Nova with a 383 in it. Without the belt, on 93 octane, it went 12.20s at about 110. Not bad, and it means this was no "econo-build" on the engine. They put the belt on and it went 9.40 @ 140, still on 93 octane. Pretty impressive.

At Pontiacs In The Park, a '69 Firebird with a 461 CID street engine (93 octane, 2,400 RPM converter) went 8.22 @ 165. Again, with the ProCharger.

ProCharger has the advantage of the blower by being belt-driven, but instead of rotors, it turns a "turbine", similar to a turbocharger. No lag, less drag. Best of all possible worlds...

With the longer stroke of the 383, it wouldn't "like" the turbo as much as it would the blower.

Nitrous is best described as "violent". VERY hard on parts. Horsepower RIGHT NOW!

Pick yer poisen...

Jim

[gorgepr]

but if I left the engine as a 350 the turbo should work beter than on a 383??

[GreyGoose006]

its a matter of the range of air volumes the engine can flow.
you see, a turbo has a specific range that it works best in.
exceed this range, and the efficiency drops like a rock, and the intake charge begins to get excessively hot.
a 383 is right about at the limit of requiring 2 turbos as opposed to one large ass turbo.
the single large turbo might work on a 350, but there would be lag, and it would be straining at the high rpms.
look at the turbos built for the 80's turbo buicks.
like this
http://www.cardomain.com/ride/322659

thats a 383 in a caprice classic with twin turbos.
not a bad day.

for simplicity though, i would recommend a dual stage nitrous setup, or a procharger.

dual stage so that you can choose how much you need/want.
25 hp and 75 hp for example.
or 75 and 150.
pick your poision.

[Mr. Luos]

Single front mount turbo.

[MrPbody]

Sounds like you're hell-bent on the turbo. If you WANT a turbo, BUY A TURBO! Personally, I've seen far too many maintainence "issues" with turboes over the years, and far prefer the belt. But I just build them. I don't own OR drive them... My little P-Body has no blower of any description... (:-

Jim

[ddnspider]

my 383 turbo.spools hella quick and makes good power.i been running around like that for 2 years no issues.

[lamehonda]

No one has really addressed cost. Aren't superchargers typically cheaper and lower maintenence. When is the last time you saw a blown supercharger? It just throws the belt sometimes right?

[Genopsyde]

bearing can go in a sc

[lamehonda]

how often does that happen? The SC doesn't spool up near as fast as a turbo right? and are we talking about replacing a bearing or the whole setup like you usually do with a blown turbo.