Subaru Impreza GC8 & RS Forum & Community banner

1 - 7 of 7 Posts

·
Registered
1994 L Wagon Grey
Joined
·
517 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
ok, well from what I know about superchargers they are basically low end and mid range beasts. They will help ya get from 0-60mph quick and 20-80mph quickly. but then after 60/80 or what not they start to run out of steam. basically I am wondering if you lined up a similar boosted turbo rs to a blown rs what would the outcome be?

From what I have been told this is kinda how it is....the speeds have been pulled out of my ass because I just don't realy have that deep of a grasp on the supercharged RS and the RS-Ts around myself are still in the tuning process so I realy don't know how hard they pull...yet.
but this is what I kinda got from the research I did:

The supercharged rs would haul huge amount off ass off the line and then start to run out of steam by 80-90 mph while the turbo rs would haul a little slower ass then the SCRS off the line and then pull hard after 60mph till drag comes into play and the car runs out of breath around 110-130(compairing smiliar SCRS to RS-T).

I am finishing up a long long build up of my RS-T but I have always....always loved the belt pulled supercharger( being a former mustang owner). So I was wondering what peoples opinions are on the supercharger and turbo.

I see a SC unit being good for a auto-x course and mabye a lower speed track. The RS-T being a good high speed track racer and roll on racer protecting america against the world of rice.

please smack me on the head if I am way off :run: :biggest:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
852 Posts
I would agree that superchargers are awesome for low end pull to get you off the line, but don't disregard the turbo. Depending on what size turbo you have, you could be suprised at how much a turbo can pull down low, especially on an RS. The turbo I am presently using is a Legacy RHB5, which in my opinion is essentially a supercharger (j/k) due to the fact that I make full boost by a measly 2200 RPM. The second you launch the car you can hear the turbo spooling. Now, turbo's with more lag are a different story. Large turbo's and large superchargers are MUCH different in my opinion. One has tons of lag, where the other has no lag. I think it all comes to size and application.

For race use, well it depends of course. No one wants to be autocrossing with their foot on the gas and be waiting for boost to kick in. A supercharger might be beneficial here. But, this could be argued. Most guys don't go over second gear autocrossing and like to pull their car to redline in second without having to shift. Well, the dynamics of a supercharger tell us they tend to run out of grunt up top. So, once again, it all comes back to size and application. Where can I get the most useable power for all different sorts of driving?

If you drive a Mustang that redlines at 5500 RPM, then I am sure a supercharger would be the most efficient choice as right when the blower is running out its time to shift. If your an 8500 RPM revving 4 banger, then up top is where is your powerband is and thats where your going to be spending most of your time; on the strip anyway.

Lots of things to consider obviously. Personally, I think turbo's are incredibly efficient compared to a supercharger. Yes, blowers are becoming more efficient with new extremely low friction technology, but nothing beats free energy, in this case the already moving air in your exhaust to spool a turbo.

Blown RS vs. Turbo RS: Same driver of both cars running the same engine management and same boost levels, same CFM flow from the air charging units, thats the only way to know.

If I had to choose (were talking 1/8 mile here, thats how long most street light races last), I would go with...............


a DEAD TIE.




Graham
 

·
Registered
1994 L Wagon Grey
Joined
·
517 Posts
Discussion Starter #3
haha, thanks. I have always been intrested to hear others opinions on this. Basically I am seeing more supercharger kits starting to be built and a few more turbo charger kits...and so with the larger selection...I was wondering peoples opinions.
-Neal
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
21 Posts
I think that you forget the one big downside to superchargers... parasitic drag. You lose a considerable amount of HP turning the blower. Given identical CFM ratings at equal intake tempetures and the same pressue, the turbo car will put down more hp at the wheels.
 

·
Registered
1995 AWD Brilliant Red Subaru
Joined
·
723 Posts
Well, with the new centrifical super chargers being introduced, i think the whole conception of blowers and mustangs will soon die out. I've seen these being used a lot with big marine engines, and they r a big hit. They are a good source of power, and are consistant and less troublesome than turbo's imho.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
852 Posts
WAY less complicated and far fewer parts. Turbo's can be a mess to get right, though when tuned properly they are quite amazing. But, the more parts, the more things have potential for breaking.

Midwayman- Your probably right, the Turbo RS would probably produce slightly more power. BUT, honestly, how much HP loss do you think were talking with something like Templar's Rotrex charger? Maybe 5-10 HP at the crank would be my guess. Sophisticated superchargers, these days, should yield lower parisitic resistance numbers. Ball-Bearing units and extremely high grade oils can make for ultra low amounts of friction among the superchargers components.


Graham
 
1 - 7 of 7 Posts
Top