Welcome to Just Commodores, a site specifically designed for all people who share the same passion as yourself.

New Posts Contact us

Just Commodores Forum Community

It takes just a moment to join our fantastic community

Register

turbo vs supercharger

PRAVX II S

Member
Joined
Jan 21, 2010
Messages
918
Reaction score
7
Points
18
Location
Australia
Members Ride
Commodore
edit.

Why wouldn't i know something on this topic?
I deal with cars every day. I have worked on both turbo and superchargers its my job to know how they work. Not to mention having to wire up
turbo timers. Boost gauges, electronic boost,
I have even fitted a turbo on my mated VL commodore.?

And yes it is proberly detuned from factory . And yes my mates turbo has been tuned.
 

AirStrike

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jun 28, 2003
Messages
8,197
Reaction score
1,291
Points
113
Age
38
Location
Melbourne
Members Ride
91' VN SS
Yeah everyone back off, he has wired a boost gauge.
Turbo is generally harder to setup and more complex due to extra components, etc.
As for the old arguement of a turbo only working up higher in the rev range, that is bullshit. You can look at different A/R's, etc to adjust when it will see boost and max boost.
A turbo is more efficient as it uses a waste product to make boost rather then crank power. A turbo setup running 10psi and a supercharged one running 10psi on the same engine, the turbo will make more power.
 

PRAVX II S

Member
Joined
Jan 21, 2010
Messages
918
Reaction score
7
Points
18
Location
Australia
Members Ride
Commodore
Yeah everyone back off, he has wired a boost gauge.
Turbo is generally harder to setup and more complex due to extra components, etc.
As for the old arguement of a turbo only working up higher in the rev range, that is bullshit. You can look at different A/R's, etc to adjust when it will see boost and max boost.
A turbo is more efficient as it uses a waste product to make boost rather then crank power. A turbo setup running 10psi and a supercharged one running 10psi on the same engine, the turbo will make more power.

I said the same in my earlier post that it uses the spent gases to run the turbo in turn its more efficient.
Lol And i have done others things then wire up a boost gauge Mate.
Back in fiji when i was a apprentice i used to coil my own stator winding for the alternators for the customers. They dont even think of doing anything like that in workshop in OZ the apprentices dont even get taught that in Oz.
 

justbad4you

IF YOR NOT A HOLDEN
Joined
Sep 29, 2005
Messages
1,669
Reaction score
19
Points
0
Location
MELBOURNE S/E BAYSIDE
Members Ride
97 VT BERLINA/ 98 VS SIII MALOO (RED) LX SLR5000
lol or chalk and cheese
Lol, but thats like comparing a banana and a apple.

Diff motor , car weight ,etc
having said that,SOOP IS in the know,,,he knows his stuff,,,,,,cheers SOOP
 
Last edited:

soop

Banned
Joined
Nov 11, 2008
Messages
3,847
Reaction score
59
Points
0
Location
Smithton, Tasmania.
Members Ride
2003 SS Commodore Series II
Yeah everyone back off, he has wired a boost gauge.
Turbo is generally harder to setup and more complex due to extra components, etc.
As for the old arguement of a turbo only working up higher in the rev range, that is bullshit. You can look at different A/R's, etc to adjust when it will see boost and max boost.
A turbo is more efficient as it uses a waste product to make boost rather then crank power. A turbo setup running 10psi and a supercharged one running 10psi on the same engine, the turbo will make more power.

Thank you for smart post.
Although I will pick you on that last part. Its not totally correct. If you're using say, a motor bike turbo at 10PSI on an ecotec, its not going to make the same power. It will be super heated air. I realise that example is rediculous. But it goes to serve a point.

Neither method of forced induction is better then the other, except in extreme cases. I mean, just look at top fuel rails.

Also, my "comparison" of a turbo charged Ecotec and an L67, was not intended to be take as though those motors are good comparisons. But still closer then a bloody BA falcon motor.
The point was, we're comparing forced induction methods, not motors.

Turbochargers are designed for specific applications just as Superchargers are and at the end of the day, neither will be efficient if you don't do your homework.
 

Claudy

French Com
Joined
May 12, 2006
Messages
450
Reaction score
4
Points
18
Age
36
Location
Perth, Two Rocks
Members Ride
Manual Gen3 VT SS + V6 VT manual turbo
I shall let u know what my vt v6 turbo has when I get it tuned next week :)
9dd9b1ca.jpg
 

justbad4you

IF YOR NOT A HOLDEN
Joined
Sep 29, 2005
Messages
1,669
Reaction score
19
Points
0
Location
MELBOURNE S/E BAYSIDE
Members Ride
97 VT BERLINA/ 98 VS SIII MALOO (RED) LX SLR5000
found this on the net>>>>>>>>>>TURBO vs SUPERCHARGER
Which one is best? Turbo vs supercharger? Let's take a look at what their pros and cons are:


Turbo Pros ( + )


Only one, where max boost / max power is required in full race, track application, where other considerations can be rejected, e.g. cost to build and develop, life expectancy etc.

Turbo Cons ( - )

Much higher boost pressure is needed in a turbo for the same bhp due to pressurized air being much hotter, due to conduction from red hot exhaust manifold.

Much more complex management needed in a turbo, to control fueling and ignition due instantaneous rise of boost pressure.

Higher pressures and temperatures encouraging detonation, turbo is the big engine destroyer.

More intercooling needed to cool inlet air.

Much higher under bonnet temperature making everything hotter and so reducing power.

High under bonnet temperature reducing life of things like wiring looms and hoses.

Much higher incidents of fire due to red hot turbo and manifold.

Compromise exhaust manifold and system function due to restriction of turbo not letting the gas flow freely.

Extra shock loadings on transmission because of sudden increase in power.


Supercharger Pros ( + )

Basically all the things the turbo is bad at the supercharger is good at.

Supercharger Cons ( - )

No dump valve to make a nice noise


For those building their own kit I would recommend always going to a supercharger 1 size above what the engine capacity suggests, as the price for the next size higher is quite small and if necessary put a restrictor in to reduce the boost. The reason I say this is that most people start off with quite modest expectations but as soon as they have it fitted they want MORE and if the supercharger they have already fitted is running at max capacity, they have to discard it and buy a complete new supercharger unit. This problem of running out of charger capacity is especially a problem if the engine is 1) High revving e.g. over 7000 rpm. 2) 16 valve unit, as they eat air quicker than 8 valves. 3) The compression is lowered.
THIS IS ONLY SOMTHING FROM THE NET ( SOOP would have a much better idea than myself) but i tought id throw this out there anyways...cheeers. and howdy SOOP
 

soop

Banned
Joined
Nov 11, 2008
Messages
3,847
Reaction score
59
Points
0
Location
Smithton, Tasmania.
Members Ride
2003 SS Commodore Series II
Clearly that was written by an unbiased member of the motoring community :p
Its wildly incorrect though.
 

justbad4you

IF YOR NOT A HOLDEN
Joined
Sep 29, 2005
Messages
1,669
Reaction score
19
Points
0
Location
MELBOURNE S/E BAYSIDE
Members Ride
97 VT BERLINA/ 98 VS SIII MALOO (RED) LX SLR5000
yeah prob is (just thought id chuck it out there) not that i know a lot on this forums issue of turbo vs s/c myself
Clearly that was written by an unbiased member of the motoring community :p
Its wildly incorrect though.
may be i should of just shhhhhhhed up on this post lol
take it easy soop and have a good 1 .cheers
 

felt27

New Member
Joined
Jan 24, 2011
Messages
12
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Age
46
Location
raceview
Members Ride
vs Executive
thanks for all your coments guys it has helped the turbo manafold is in turbo is on piping up intercooler when finished ill post photoes it wasnt hard to fit just need someone to tune computer .(next hassel) lol
 
Top