Subaru Impreza GC8 & RS Forum & Community banner

turbo or supercharge

  • turbo

    Votes: 40 69.0%
  • supercharge

    Votes: 18 31.0%

  • Total voters
    58
1 - 20 of 22 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
38 Posts
Discussion Starter #1 (Edited)
i just installed the greddy e manage engine managment and since i have all this cool computer crap to play with (and the MY99s have the lowest compresion 2.5 block) now i want some form of forced induction ie turbo or SC, i was all gung ho about a turbo but with the new developments in the SC feild i cant make up my mind. so im hoping you guys can help me. my goals are to run mid 13's, i also wan tto be able to keep up with 2wd cars on the highway. i dont auto x but i would like to and the thing i want most is reliabilty, i drive this car every day to and from college. and it has 69k on it rght now and im planning on keeping it untill the day it dies (which at that time it wil get rebuilt :D )

thanks in advance,
Nate

P.S. i wanna use sotck internals with upgraded injectors and with a turbo i would reach my goal with about 6psi and a good clutch. i dont know dick about superchargers which is why im asking for help

edit: also if you dont mind please state why you like one or the other. thanks!
 

·
13 Years of RS
2005 Toyota Corolla :(
Joined
·
5,532 Posts
Well, I'm voting SC, since that's what I want to do. The SC builds boost as you rev, so it doesn't have the big power hit to the driveline like you get with the turbo. To me, that means the transmission will last longer, and that's a good thing. And the way a SC delivers boost should make it easier to keep the stock engine internals, too.
 

·
Registered
2004 Forester XTi
Joined
·
1,005 Posts
Yeah, what :stupid: said... :D and that you won't have to worry about any long/short term failure with the drivetrain. :nuetron: If you wanna tune the SC, then get a smaller diameter slave pully and it will pump out a few extra psi. Hahaha!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
41 Posts
Supercharger vs. Turbo

I don't know much about turbos or superchargers, but I do know that the supercharger kit Templar is making is a good one. If you haven't read the thread about it, you might do so and let that sway your opinion. It is a small unit and will be a DIY install kit (no running to the Home Despot for this or that) for stages I & II. I also think the price will be cheaper than a turbo. Shop around though and check out this thread about Templar's SC. You can also send him a private message or an email and he'll answer any questions you have left. Goodness knows he answers all of mine! :D


Elizabeth
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
38 Posts
Discussion Starter #6
i understand the the power delivery of the SC is smoother and more liniar but when i race i launch the car hard so turbo or SC my car will still feel the pain, lol everyone seems to be heading towards the SC though, im going to let this come down to cost.

Thanks!
Nate
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
852 Posts
I don't agree that the SC will be easier on the motor, even though it adds boost as you rev higher. I think DNT's kit makes 6 psi by redline, so that means it should be around 5 psi at 5000 Rpm, 4 psi around 4000 RPM, and so on. This is not too much different than what you would get with a turbo, since a 5 psi kit will make that by about 3000 RPM and hold it all the way to redline. When you punch the gas with a turbo, you don't have to wait but 400-500 RPM to feel the full effect, whereas with a SC, you will have to wait to redline to feel the full effects, and we all know that the 2.5 L engine is nothing of a top performer in the upper RPM range.

Don't get me wrong, I am not bashing SC, but I don't think that they will put a heck of a lot less stress on the motor. This of course is a different story for the trannies, where the gradual increase in power will be more forgiving. Remember though, our trannies are weak from the factory, so even though a SC RS might seem more reliable with the tranny, this still leaves no room for destructive shifting, as this is what causes gear loss, with the addition of lots of torque (which our forced induction motors produce).

Graham
 

·
Registered
2001 Magic Mobile
Joined
·
934 Posts
I think you'll just have to wait and see. Since DNT's SC (and others?) aren't out yet, this is all just speculation. SC does sound simplier and like it has less maintainence.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
426 Posts
Turbo, dawg, turbo. Superchargers kill your low end power. All that drag on the crankshaft, and the low boost at those rpms make your engine drag hard below 3000rpm. Turbos are great; you don't get as much drag on the engine in low rpms and you get that awesome whoosh of power that throws you into the seat. :D
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
613 Posts
depends upon if you want to pull stumps or not. although i wouldn't get a blower without a big trans. pics of blower/big trans
edit; digital bath you need a ride in the frankenscooby. it pulls from idle. no lag. if anything it trys to anticipate.rev matching blips are scarey fast.
 

·
Registered
1994 L Wagon Grey
Joined
·
517 Posts
Digital_Bath said:
Turbo, dawg, turbo. Superchargers kill your low end power. All that drag on the crankshaft, and the low boost at those rpms make your engine drag hard below 3000rpm. Turbos are great; you don't get as much drag on the engine in low rpms and you get that awesome whoosh of power that throws you into the seat. :D
your kidding...right? superchargers are like instant boost from the moment you put the hammer down. Its no waiting power. Of course you could pick hairs because some blowers are laggy because of the type of boost they are made for. But most eaton/roots type blowers are the type for low end torque!

besides the drag is so minimal. you honestly need to ride in a supercharged car before you can say that.

on the other hand. This is my personal opinion on turbo ver super.
go turbo: if your on a budget, will want more power later, looking for 12s or lower

go blown: if your looking for power that will be more useable for daily driving (torque and instant power), looking for somthing unique
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
426 Posts
I'm totally serious. All the SC cars I've been in have sucked in the low RPMs. I was in a supercharged Lexus IS that might as well have been a Geo before you got revved up.

OK, I'm exaggerating the effect, but the SC sucked up a lot of the punch that car had in the low end.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
613 Posts
" All the SC cars I've been in have sucked in the low RPMs." how many sc cars have you been in? all the ones i have been in (mine and a lingenfelter c4 with a snail blower, and a v8 mercedes sedan once again snail blower.) have been a real head jerkers from idle.
and,well i've chassis dynoed mine off idle it drew a line similar to a cliff . a BIG cliff
"I was in a supercharged Lexus IS that might as well have been a Geo before you got revved up." these are symptoms of turbo. this supercharger is seamless. it has NO lag. it is so totally different from a turbo.
the notion that a turbo can suddenly dangerously load the driveline is off base as well. if anything, horsepower which comes on late and ramps up rather gently is safer. on a blower application you get loads of torque. a good launch and you get tranny soup.
ps that lingenfelter is nasty but i can take the mercedes. digital b, you need a ride in this car.:sunny:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
613 Posts
now let's talk parasitic drag; my chevy v8 does not even know the a/c is on. but when my miata a/c compresser kicks in, i almost pull over to see what's wrong. the scooby blower drag is i swear to elvis totally unnoticable. totally. a little burble can be heard. sounds like a tea kettle boiling other than a mad max whine under load, that's it.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
426 Posts
Doh! Here I am with my foot in my mouth, fault of my own poor communication skills.

I shouldn't have said "sucked" at all. The SC cars I've been in definitely put down some serious power and were hoot and a holler to be in. However, the one car I've been in that was NA and was converted to SC (Lexus IS) definitely lost some power on the low end. Like I said, I shouldn't have said "sucked" at all, but there was certainly a noticeable loss. The top end was something to behold though :eek: Different engines behave differently under the SC...how will the H4 of our little honeys be? I guess we'll find out.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
613 Posts
i hate to be a pain in th ass but if you are experiencing power loss at low r's, then there is something wrong with the setup, tuning, velocity surge, something. because there is no power loss at low rpms. even with ten ft of 2-3/4" of hose to the fmic. repeat no power loss. sorry.
 

·
Registered
my00 RS
Joined
·
327 Posts
I have to agree, with 5252. At launch in first gear, going gently, I will blow the door off many things. I get full boost below 2000 rpm. First gear lasts like 2 seconds. SC give our engines incred torque. Put it this way, I think I still slip my exedy clutch in second and part of third gear. Which is fine by me as it saves the tranny. Thats at 6-7 psi. If i had a fmic and dog gears like 5252 and 10 psi, I prob pee my pants from the raw power from launching.

MadMax
 
1 - 20 of 22 Posts
Top