Nigcharger vs nigcharger

Electric Turbo into a Super Charger into a Turbo into an Air Compressor
100+lbs of boost

EASY.

"SPEED AND TORQUE NOW LIKE RIGHT NOW I DON'T CARE ABOUT THE FUTURE AS LONG AS I CAN GET SOME IMMEDIATE GRATIFICATION!!!" = Supercharger

"I want power but I'm willing to work for it if it means going fast as FUCK as soon as they have their evening tea" = Turbo.

Supercharge if V8 or maybe a large displacement V6

Turbo works well in pretty much anything

supercharger.
>more reliable
>easier to install
>less to go wrong
>dat whine
>dat instant power delivery

Essentially:

Supercharger Pros: Faster startup because it is belt driven (connected directly to the engine) and gives you more low end torque and acceleration. Also runs cooler and less complicated.

Cons: Power from the superchargers dies off at higher revs.

Superchargers are a lot better if you're not actually gonna put it on a track, much better for street use.

Turbo Pros: More consistent power AFTER they are spooled up. Shit ton of power at higher revs. You'll be able to reach much higher top speeds.

Cons: More complicated, get hot AF, and have to spool up before they kick in because they rely on exhaust gasses to power them.

Turbo makes more power at all engine speeds
Supercharger is outdated tech for baby boomers

>that full boost ls2 super vs turbo test
fullboost.com.au/forum/showthread.php?43437-BOOST-vs-BOOST-(Supercharged-vs-Turbo)-V8-comparison-by-MPW

Definitely depends on the car and engine. Like, I wouldn't mind having a Saturn Ion Redline for DD and some fun, but I would definitely want to turbo a rotary track car

>less power

>cant choose N/A

I know this is important for some reason. I'm not sure why. It just seems like super important for some reason.

don't care. more civilized road manners, more reliable, and easier to live with. I'm not racing. I'm daily driving, with the occasional stop light grand prix.

>more reliably
Entirety and utterly incorrect
There is a reason diesels have used turbos since the 50s

>not getting based suicide doors

>forced induction

displacelets baka
when will they learn desu

...

>v6

>diesels
opinion discarded.

If V6s are garbage then what does that make the V8s that lost to it? :^)

Why not twin turbo your twin blown v8s?

I mentioned diesels because theyve always been heavily reliant on forced induction
How many supercharged diesels are there? None on the market, its all turbos
And bevause they are superior in EVERY. SINGLE. WAY.
Gasoline engines are no different

Stay in denial, stupidcharger cuck

>murcielago
>v8

Nope

compounded boost, hoe

>yfw you replied to me, Stolen Recaros
>I have suicide doors but no supercharger
feels bad man.

>more reliable
Yeah, no.
>easier to install
If you're a faggot, sure
>less to go wrong
Yeah, no.
>dat whine
Bend a turbo blade.
youtube.com/watch?v=5Vb5LwKHFDg
>instant power delivery
Yeah, all nothing of it.

With a modern twin scroll ball bearing turbo, there is no reason at all not go turbo.
Only faggots who can't weld go shitchargers.

INTO

THE

TRASH

looks good famerino but that powertrain is only there for marketing reasons.

>only faggots who cant weld
Or baby boomer nhra cock sucking faggots who still live in the 1940s

>that powertrain is only there because a V8 wouldn't fit
FTFY

Dude actually makes a good point.

There's no superchargers left in aircraft or ships, it's literally only cars for lazy cunts.

Turbos make more power, make less heat, make the car use less fuel (by both not sapping power at partial throttle and causing an increase in exhaust speed at said partial throttle increasing flow efficiency), are much more reliable and if the piping is done correctly, is lighter.
They're easier to intercool and allow much, much greater (and cheaper) choice of what power you want. With the same manifold you can have a little GT28 or a GT42.

Charger.

I'm sorry user, but I'm not Stolen Recaros
>tfw he stopped being a tripfag

>Implying there won't be LS swapped GTs everywhere in a year and a half

Swapping in inferior engines seems to be an american thing
>rx7 ls swaps
>supra ls swaps
>miata ls swaps

>people are actually upset I stopped tripping to avoid the faggotry

>tfw best of boomer meets best of millennialfag

>turbo makes more power at all engine speeds

But that's wrong, you fucking retard.

>inferior
>miata
It's a fucking FWD ford engine, retard. You could swap a 13B renesis in it and it would STILL be an improvement.

Is that a cunting 90 degree on the exhaust?
What the shit

If i was a richfag i would absolutely do a cammed voodoo swap to make people salty

desu senpai you made me a bit happy I have a Saturn, you were always pretty informative. I want to get a Redline thanks to you
n-no homo tho

Except it's not. At all.

If you're spending $6k on a supercharger, you get to compare it to a $6k variable geometry turbo that only needs to beat a shitcharger at the top end by about 5hp.

That would be on boost at or even below 1000rpm, which is below idle for me in neutral.

youtube.com/watch?v=lgZI1Bt_r3w
/thread

I was sick of people belittling my opions because I was a tripfag.
>say something as tripfag
>loll faggot, you dunt know nuthin'! Stupid tripfag. Everyone ignore him, he just wants attention.

>say same info as anonymous
>omg you're brilliant! I will follow your advice! Thanks user!

I did enjoy putting out actual info about GM products to counteract the faggots here who've never driven or owned a GM product but say its shit because their parents said they were shit in the 70's.

Guess what. It isn't the 70s anymore.

Except supercharger kits start at around 3K.

Fails to mention cost too, superchargers are generally very expensive

I guess the hostility is to be expected on here. Thanks for being one of the more useful faggots on here though

See video in then proceed to kys

I always hear turbos are laggy because it takes some time at WOT before they spool up, and superchargers are more responsive but the drag they put on the engine makes them worse for MPGs and high HP numbers.

>superchargers good down low but fall off up top
Doesn't it depend more on the size and configuration of the supercharger though? Couldn't they be designed to give boost at either end?

>Thanks for being one of the more useful faggots on here though
umm... you're welcome?

Instant power and not as much of douche bag

Not turbo-ed

It's okay little guy turbo 4 cylinders are still... okay

actually, superchargers are generally cheaper than turbos because they're simpler designs.

>Eaton M90
>36 lbs/min
>$1000

>Borg Warner SXE 9180
>91 lbs/min
>$750

Generally only roots blowers are cheap. See the wealth of eatons on eBay for 1000 and less. I've seen reman m90s for like 5-600 dollars. A top quality turbo can be had for 1000.

Eatons are stupid cheap on eBay because they're common OEM equipment. T25s and K03s are similarly cheap.

I pick both

To aid in auto-detonation.

Is that just the turbo or does it include the headers, intercooler, and ecu tune?

I didn't read any posts.

If you honestly think super chargers are still good or even better, you need to do some research.

Turbos have come a long, long way. Even from the 90's.

90 tuner cars are even better because of turbo innovations the past decade. Spool times are lower by a shit ton, etc.

Big ass turbos on Supras back then that took until 4K RPM to spool are now.....idk even less due to twin scroll and shit.

There's that one Aussie channel too who did a R32 GTR twin turbo build using the same parts that were well renowned back in the 90's and compared it to a modern twin scroll. Spooled sooner at much lower RPM, hit boost faster due to it, and delivered more power.

Turbos, bros. Way of the future.

You mean variable compression N/A

Nope. Turbocharged li-ion.

Sorry, I vomited in my mouth a little

>engine has high compression at low revs to create more exhaust pressure which means the turbo spools faster, sooner
>gradually reduces engine compression as the turbo spins at higher engine rpm
Nice

Compression doesn't actually affect spool. Doesn't matter how small a volume you cram a pound of air into, that's still just one pound flowing past the turbine.

Just the supercharger, and just the turbo.

Compressed air will move at higher speed as is trying to reach normal atmospheric pressure

Regardless of whether your compression ratio is 8:1 or 12:1, the combustion chamber is going to be the same size when the exhaust valve is fully open. If you don't believe me, just Google it and you will learn something new today.

And I bet it costs an arm and a leg, plus your first born to just buy it. (Both nuts if you don't have a child yet will also be accepted)

This whole "modern turbos have no lag" meme needs to die.

A turbo that makes 0.21 pounds of boost isn't going to have lag, but anything bigger than a toothpick windmill is going to need some force from the engine to spool. Making "some boost" at low RPM isn't the same as "no lag."

That being said, peak horsepower numbers are easier to attain with a turbocharger. They have the ability to make higher boost numbers easier due to their design being a large, metal, vacuum cleaner.

Turbos have synergy with modern technology, GDI and DOHC applications make tuning a turbo engine a lot easier.

Superchargers on the other hand build power linearly with engine RPM, so you don't get lurches of power that could potentially cause loss of stability. With a low-end cam profile, a positive displacement supercharger can iron out a torque curve like nothing else, and can build large amounts of horsepower before peak torque is made.

Superchargers are old tech, and work very well with large displacement, SOHC or OHV engines, because they tend to build torque earlier as opposed to high revving DOHC engines that make their power in the high-end. They can't be tuned easily, the closest thing to "tuning" a supercharger is a smaller pulley for more boost, a light flywheel to rev faster, and looser valve springs (though you start to risk valve float at that point).

They don't achieve high peak horsepower numbers without a lot of work, but they flatten out the powercurve of an engine nicely, and can make some decent power doing it. They can still be good for racing, but with modern technology theres not a whole lot of reason to add displacement over a turbo.

I still like superchargers more though, N/A response time and powercurve is A+

$2000, or $700 for its little brother (same geometry, but without most of the features). Considering it negates the requirement for a $350 wastegate, $150 blowoff valve, and $100 electronic boost controller, I wouldn't say that's particularly excessive.

You're confusing lag with spool threshold.

They were pretty shit in the 90's but they've come a long way in 20 years.

> less heat
No
> more reliable
No

Turbos advantages are already pretty clear cut you don't need to make shit up

I'm pretty sure Ford took that engine from Mazda.

Factory application? Turbo > Supercharger.

Aftermarket application? If a supercharger meets your power goals, use one. If not, go turbo. Exception: cheapass junkyard boost projects.

Turbo with meth injection + nitrous > either of those two.

>internal everything
Fuck that noise.

Positive displacement superchargers are good on a V-anything though. They're even a good match for torqueless I4's.

all turbos lag, it's the law of physics.
it's just a matter of how well it can be disguised.

>Electric Turbo
No.

>into an Air Compressor
(Turbo-)superchargers are air compressors you idiot.

>100+lbs of boost
Have fun scraping those internals off the pavement.

>Faster startup
wat

>supercharger runs cooler
>turbos get hot AF
Utterly wrong. Turbo's have 80 to 85% efficient compression, positive displacement are up to 60% efficient. Inefficient compression is what heats up the intake air.

>You'll be able to reach much higher top speeds.
Learn some engineering mate.

>Couldn't they be designed to give boost at either end?
Yes.

They designed the entire car around the 3.5 Ecoboost. If they started by designing it around a twinturbo Voodoo, it would've fit.

Thing is, they went with the V6 for marketing reasons.

Try entire kits the next time you wanna shitpost.

>Turbo's only work on DI DOHC engines
>Superchargers only work on SOHC/OHV engines
No. They might exaggerate the character of an engine, but a supercharger Modular and a twinturbo LS are both impressive engines.

>what is anti-lag

>what is anti-lag
Something that heats up your exhaust manifold massively, increasing heat in the turbo. This causes decreased bearing life, decrease manifold life, and is simply unacceptable in an OEM application. Also, noise violation.

user, direct injection also decreases your engine's life and yet, it's OEM.

If you can afford it, why not have it?

>user, direct injection also decreases your engine's life and yet, it's OEM.
Direct injection directly decreases emissions output. The only downside is that your intake manifold gets a bit dirty - which you can fix by just putting in a secondary set of port injectors (which also help with throttle response).

Antilag causes NVH problems, emissions problems, and is simply unfit for consumer use.

Can't find any turbo kits for my v6 'tang. What do?

How come DI engines are total trash then?

Besides you also have the shitty little turbos that are added to the small engines these days. Those also love to break, not to mention how does the high compression ratio on your engine affect it's life.

It sounds like fucking shit don't even kid yourself.

But that's not shiny and chrome.

>How come DI engines are total trash then?
Nicely supported claim you've got there.

Sell it, buy a V8.

>reliability reports on TFI/TFSI engines
Just google it. I'm not gonna spoonfeed you.

I'd rather procharge, but if I had to pick, it would be turbo