turbo vs supercharger

[felt27]

wich is easyer to do and what works better .do you have to plum piping into the supercharger like the turbo
i have a turbo manifald but its not the best any help would be great...

 

[justbad4you]

twin turbo if you got the bucks? if not get a s/c v6 motor from a donor car and whack out the old v6 and whack in the newer s/c v6

wich is easyer to do and what works better .do you have to plum piping into the supercharger like the turbo
i have a turbo manifald but its not the best any help would be great...

AND OFF YOU GO WITH THE NEW S/C V6

 

[soop]

Holy crap come on school year!

Both work differently.

IMO turbo's are more effcient. They both work about as well as one another though.
It totally depends on what style of supercharger you're using.

Positive displacement superchargers sit in the valley of the motor.
There is two main types of positive displacement chargers.
Vein and screw.
Vein type chargers use multiple bladed veins interlocking to compress the air.

If I recall correctly, L67's use an Eaton M90 (or a variant) which is a vein type charger.

Screw type chargers use threaded screws which interlock to compress the air.

Then you have Centrifugal chargers.
They're essentially a belt driven turbo charger.
I don't like them, I don't think they're overally efficient. There's more to them then that, and various styles. I don't understand enough about them though. Should probably fix that.

 

[justbad4you]

lol well said soop

Holy crap come on school year!

Both work differently.

IMO turbo's are more effcient. They both work about as well as one another though.
It totally depends on what style of supercharger you're using.

Positive displacement superchargers sit in the valley of the motor.
There is two main types of positive displacement chargers.
Vein and screw.
Vein type chargers use multiple bladed veins interlocking to compress the air.

Screw type chargers use threaded screws which interlock to compress the air.

Then you have Centrifugal chargers.
They're essentially a belt driven turbo charger.
I don't like them, I don't think they're overally efficient. There's more to them then that, and various styles. I don't understand enough about them though. Should probably fix that.

 

[soop]

Here's a cut away of a centrifugal supercharger;

Different brands do it differently, but the end result is usually the same. That said some are better then others. Some are cheap and nasty and don't hit any sort of usable boost untill redline.
Research is key to finding out which is best for you.

 

[PRAVX II S]

I think they make supercharger kits for the ecotec. But have not herd a Turbo kit for the ecotec.
I like the idea of a turbo charger as said before its more efficient. It reuses the burned gases to operate the turbo. Were the supercharger is belt driven.

 

[soop]

In respect to how their driven, neither is any more efficient.

I think turbo's tend to have a better heat/psi ratio. Which is to say, for every 1psi of pressure generated there is less degrees celsius in exchange. This isn't always true, if you're trying to spin a turbo too fast it will run outside of its efficiency range and simply generate super heated air, essentially giving you a fauls indication of pressure (Hot air expands and creats a higher air pressure but still doesn't contain any more oxygen, so the engine is getting ripped off)

Superchargers have a similar issue, which is usually combatted by using a supercharger that is slightly too big for the engine and underdriving it (smaller pulley). This give less pressure but more oxygen with less heat.
As is everything to do with engine modification, its a trade off.

 

[PRAVX II S]

In respect to how their driven, neither is any more efficient.

I think turbo's tend to have a better heat/psi ratio. Which is to say, for every 1psi of pressure generated there is less degrees celsius in exchange. This isn't always true, if you're trying to spin a turbo too fast it will run outside of its efficiency range and simply generate super heated air, essentially giving you a fauls indication of pressure (Hot air expands and creats a higher air pressure but still doesn't contain any more oxygen, so the engine is getting ripped off)

Superchargers have a similar issue, which is usually combatted by using a supercharger that is slightly too big for the engine and underdriving it (smaller pulley). This give less pressure but more oxygen with less heat.
As is everything to do with engine modification, its a trade off.

The turbo is reusing the spent gases out of the engine in-turn being efficient. Rather then just traveling down the exhaust and out.
The super charger is runing of the motor belt driven. Its another load on the motor.
Like the air-conditioning compressor when activated its more load.

 

[soop]

Yeah except that the supercharger power output far exceeds what it uses.
The turbo is no better, at low RPM its a major exhaust restriction.

 

[justbad4you]

have a look at this beast >>>Google Image Result for http://www.spencerraceengines.com/images/chris_usb_104.jpg

wich is easyer to do and what works better .do you have to plum piping into the supercharger like the turbo
i have a turbo manifald but its not the best any help would be great...

or take a look at this 1 >>>> http://www.google.com.au/imgres?img...a=X&ei=8VBATY_sBY2uvgP5qszjAg&ved=0CCAQ9QEwAQ