http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MGdg2Fd2WQY
Superchargerrrrrrrrrrrr of course power all the way through the gears! Thats If you have some spare $$$
For me principly because the best sounding engine of all time was a R/R Merlin
I vote Supercharger :-)
Admitidly Turbos have overcome most of the things I don't like about them, but hell I like living in the past
F1 Engine Suppliers and All of the OEM's have chosen Turbochargers.... so theres your answer.
Turbochagers have overcome their limitation of lacking low end power but Superchargers cannot (by design) overcome their limitation of sapping engine
power to run and being massively more expensive.
The supercharger (somewhat sadly) will soon be confined to Drag Racing, some 'halo' brands and the history books.
Both.....
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CmcTY2erGCk
and...
LINKY
[Edited on 10/8/11 by Litemoth]
Turbo
For road use, a supercharger wins out. There is no lag, the power is ther at all RPM in every gear which means less changing gears to keep it on
boost. Supercharger will build boost prgressively with RPM as well.
For racing a turbo is cheaper and more reliable as there is no complex drive system to maintain.
Production cars use primarily turbos solely for cost reasons, so citing that as a reason for them to be better because 'all production cars use
them' is quite frankly horse crap. But the new TFSI VW range all use both a supercharger and turbo.
The most powerful internal combustion engines built in terms of bhp/litre (top fuel dragsters) use superchargers as they want power all the way up the
rpm range as they only have 1 gear.
So pay your money and take your choice really. A supercharger install will likely be more expensive but more refined in terms of power delivery.
Both are capable of making the same peak BHP with the same level of boost. But the torque curve from a good supercharger install will be much smoother
than a good turbo install.
[Edited on 10/8/11 by flak monkey]
quote:
Originally posted by flak monkey
Production cars use primarily turbos solely for cost reasons, so citing that as a reason for them to be better because 'all production cars use them' is quite frankly horse crap. [Edited on 10/8/11 by flak monkey]
Throw us a dyno sheet Flak
Here you go dyno result from my 2 litre duratec with Rotrex supercharger, 0.67bar peak boost (blue line), power in green and torque in red
quote:
Originally posted by Doctor Derek Doctors
F1 Engine Suppliers and All of the OEM's have chosen Turbochargers.... so theres your answer.
Turbochagers have overcome their limitation of lacking low end power but Superchargers cannot (by design) overcome their limitation of sapping engine power to run and being massively more expensive.
The supercharger (somewhat sadly) will soon be confined to Drag Racing, some 'halo' brands and the history books.
Having now driven both - tin-top turbos for years and supercharged Se7en for the last 3 my preference is for exactly that.
Turbos on tin-tops give great performance when you need it but for sheer low down grunt, hair trigger throttle and linear acceleration there's
nothing quite like supercharged 650kgs.
Cheers, Pewe
quote:
Originally posted by flak monkey
Here you go dyno result from my 2 litre duratec with Rotrex supercharger, 0.67bar peak boost (blue line), power in green and torque in red
I'd say a turbocharger but with compounded drive to the crank so to extract maximum enthalpy from the exhaust gas.
I say turbo because i have 1 in my mk indy and 1 in my vxr corsa
I don't care which is better really, I'm ditching my turbo on my volvo T5 and subbing in an Eaton charger because I like chargers more. Don't know why but i guess its the same kind of thing as me liking odd numbers better than evens.
quote:
Originally posted by spiderman01980
how much was your supercharger?
I think that either works well - if i were driving long distances , or even short, on a trailing throttle with zero boost I think I would go for a
turbo to give great overtaking ability and low friction losses when cruising.
If most of my driving was track days I would go supercharger.
My personal preference is Turbos but I can see the advantages of superchargers as well.
Just to have 2 dynos sheets for people that are intrested,
1st one with 0.45bar and 270 hp,and second is at 1.05 bar and 390 hp,
u ca see that if the turbo is right,the lag doesnt exist.
some useless info
turbos are used as this improves the CARNOT efficency. its that frenchman again.
a large capacity turbocharged engine has a better efficiency than a small non turbo.
thats why they are used on lots of cars now.
(the internal turbine on a ford turbo cost the ford motor company 55p to produce --so they are also cheap to build now.)
im sure i read something somewhere when a works rally mechanic was asked what he would prefer to fit to the car he said superchargers everytime. (it
was probably on here!)
IC
WHAT ARE YOU PEOPLE ON?
Everyone knows that the electric superchargers on eBay are the best!
quote:
Originally posted by ianclark1275
some useless info
turbos are used as this improves the CARNOT efficency. its that frenchman again.
a large capacity turbocharged engine has a better efficiency than a small non turbo.
HP can be thirsty on demand
On this turbo,it maxes out it self at 1.35bar and 440,and we havent tried 2.2 bar with the new gtx3076 series that spools 200 rpm earlier and about 40-50 hp at the same boost,dont want to try that