BLOWERS BLOWERS BLOWERS!

turbo lag is a thing of the past

...

But how much money do you need to pour into a well put together setup to achieve that with a turbo?

Someday I'll actually put it back together.

shit opinion
youtube.com/watch?v=EHg2uqJvLOk

If you've a torquey v8 you don't need more terks

Not that I have anything against ill informed tripe, but in my mind you're an idiot.
No more than any other retro fit turbo setup. Just put a little effort into matching housings with your engine. Don't just go for the biggest unit you can afford, because bigger=/=better.
A well matched turbo will have a broader boost curve than a well matched belt driven pump.

Anti lag wouldn't exist if that was true. A tiny ass turbo spools up almost instantly, yes, but then you got no top end power.

turbo lag will always exist, you can mask it or reduce it till it's imperceptible but we're not there yet.
in fact the advances made in turbo performance have been minimal over the last 30 years, it's other things like electric throttle bodies, vvt, dsg transmissions that have reduced how noticeable it is. however even in a mclaren p1 or bugatti veyron you can still feel the lag.

Fun history:

Vortech was started by a designer and salesman from Paxton.
Paxton thought the gear whine from the gear drive would be too loud and people wouldn't want it over Paxton's silent ball drive system, so they left and started their own company.
Notice a vortech bolts up to an SN series Paxton's brackets.

Procharger was started by a vortech employee who started his own company.

Powerdyne was another concept from a Paxton designer. Paxton thought the belt drive system was not reliable enough, so the designer left and started his own company.

Granatelli bought Paxton.
Swan song Paxton was the GSS (granatelli signature series).
It had all the design enhancements from years of sn's, including the optional high output impeller thats hard to find.

The rights to SN series Paxton's are held by a California wheel company (forget their name).
Owner is old school and doesn't deal with the internet- if you find factory rebuild kits on eBay its another guru that deals with internet sales for a cut of the profits.

>who makes the best forced induction monster for the money?

Turbonetics or Precision I suppose

I run high compression, 9.7:1, so I have a paxton 1220S with meth injection with 7psi

Question for you tarbodudes

Do you ever get irritated by BOVs?

Bait, but I'll play.

Friend has an engine build that's very similar to mine.
He's at 9.2:1
I'm at 11.2:1
We have different intakes, but numbers from all tests are very similar.
Everything else is identical.
Except.
He went turbo.
I went super.
He squeezed out 900+hp @ 21 psi on the dyno
He dialed it down of course to around 700hp.
I'm hitting just under 600hp @ 7 psi .

My torque curve is still better than his.
My 60 foot, 100 foot, 1/8 and 1/4 times are faster than his.

EUROCHARGED

He must be a shit driver or have a shit tuner because no way that should be happening
Turbo ls2 vs supercharged ls2 the turbo has superior power and torque delivery at all rpms

Currently saving up for a littlefield 871 to be mated with my 540 bbc

Best s/c would be whipples twin screw
I would get one but I'm not made of money

Post dyno sheets for these better torque curves on identical engines.

But it happens all the time superchargers have superior bottom end

fullboost.com.au/forum/showthread.php?43437-BOOST-vs-BOOST-(Supercharged-vs-Turbo)-V8-comparison-by-MPW

Superchargers can't compete at all
They are inferior antiquated technology only suited to boomers and their feelings

LMA fucking O
Video is bullshit.
Look at first dyno they show with the supercharger, graph says its over 350hp
Then they don't show a graph for the turbo run, only the comparison graph, WHERE THE SUPER ONLY PEAKED AT 300hp.

Scam artist selling turbos.

Try again.

Confirmation bias resulting in you being full retard
Roflmao

>2016
>turbo

kek

>500hp
>engine now weighs 900lb
Roflmao

Super dyno

Turbo dyno

If you don't understand why the are under the curve is more important than peak, then you shouldn't be posting here.
Turbo lost off the line, by the time that thing spools up, super is 4 car lengths ahead.
Look at those graphs.

>being this stupid
Turbo offers superior area under the curve over all other methods of induction
Theres a reason all the fastest street legal drag cars run parallel turbos

>outdated
There's a reason it's still around especially roots stayed, because it's dirt cheap and anyone can do it you can run it with carbs and still have no electronics plus with just a couple different ratio pulleys you can have different drive ratios and go anywhere between 2 psi to 30 if you are crazy enough, all with maybe 20 minutes of work
Just watched that video
If you do listen closely you can hear him say "we don't want anyone to think one is better then the other if we put a comparable size turbo to the supercharger we would see similar power"
Plus look at those curves the turbo is fucking gradual as fuck
Plus they had to put a 3400 rpm stall convertor in it to avoid lag
Now if that were a s/c it would be making boost at idle
YOU NEED TO REV TO 3400 RPM TO SPOOL THE TURBO AND BETTER YET FUCKING MOVE
WEW LAD

Gee golly would you look at that these old dated relics are propelling cars past 300 miles an hour
Seems pretty relevant to me

Turbo is banned from nhra as well as ohc engines

Turbos for 4.8 vortec to make 1000hp, $500 a turbo and scrap metal plumbing
Supercharger capable of the same power on a 4.8 vortec, over 5k
Turbos are superior power and cost

>superior area under the curve.
Not what the graphs show.

>drag cars
You don't spend your life at 8,000 RPMs like they do. Off idle (I.e. the real world) superchargers shit all over tarbos.

anyone have experience adding a blower to a small displacement engine? I like the idea of a supercharger over a turbo, but most small cars lean toward turbo kits. would it be worth doing over a turbo?

Dosent matter
Roots is still fastest on the strip
And that is some pure fucking bull if you need 5k to get close to 1000 hp when a roots will only set you back 3k ready to bolt on for a high quality blower not some low quality eBay special
And I just did some research it's around 2200 with a twin to get you into that territory and alot of people are also running nitro so there is alot more then just a "500 dollar turbo and scrap metal"
Turbos are never superior in a cost to power ratio that is why people like to run superchargers

I have a Comptech blower on my Si. Currently making approximately 300whp.

Having positive boost at idle is great. Dunno wtf turbo loyalty is about.

Also
>Select all the images with street numbers
>Click the same tile THIRTEEN TIMES
Faggot fucks

All you guys talking about spending thousands of dollars on combustion engine modifications, these are going to all be derelict and useless when self driving electric cars are the law.

we'll be talking about supercapacitors and software tweaks to the navigation hardware by then.

You know, that just sounds fucking awful.
I'm about to buy heads and a Novi for my little 5.0, and then I'm reading about the obama administration ideas on self driving cars.
Will they all be forced to stay in the slow lane unless passing? Just like I will?
Are cops going to be prevalent as fuck?
Are they going to use these new self driving cars to catch speeders in the regular cars?

I'm scared.
I really am.

Plug on two VGT's with a quick spool valve on each - or use a small nitrous shot to get it going.

>If you've a torquey v8 you don't need more terks
But user, centrifugals add torque too!

>Not what the graphs show
what graphs? res is turbo, blue is super

>Off idle (I.e. the real world) superchargers shit all over tarbos
because everyone races around at 1000rpm right? even then, it doesnt matter

show me a supercharger that can do this, or get a car into 9s for 5k total (including buying the car)
hotrod.com/articles/hrdp-1109-stock-gm-ls-engine-big-bang-theory/
dragzine.com/features/car-features/matt-happels-newest-9-second-junkyard-fairmont-sleeper/
now kys

>I hear the response isn't as immediate as a roots style blower.
Throttle response is just as good (if not better because your ECU doesn't have to compensate for the heat), but centrifugals simply build boost by making RPM, unlike positive displacement units (which make boost at just about every RPM).

cops with manual driving cars will be more rare, since many will use automated shit to get to crime scenes. patrols will be done with drones and other autonomous cars. You'll be flying your P-51 Mustang while everyone else gives it up for Airbus

>He's at 9.2:1
>I'm at 11.2:1
There's the problem.

so not only is the turbo making 30% more power, its also less stressed and thus more reliable?
stupidcharger cucks btfo

>Turbo is banned from nhra as well as ohc engines
Only turbo is banned in Top Fuel (not banned in other classes btw), OHC is not (but why make it OHC if you're limited to 2v?).

It's not that it's less stressed, if you ran the turbocharger at 11.2:1 you'd have to dial the boost back to around the 7 psi mark also

More like 10 PSI, because you can actually properly intercool a turbo - you can't do that easily/cheaply on a positive displacement supercharger.

>turbo lost off the line
Maybe if your car only has a 1000rpm stall converter, or you're too inadequate to operate a clutch pedal and a throttle at the same time.

It goes
It goes
It goes
It goes
It goes
EEEEUUUUUUUURRRRROOOOOCHARGED

>9.7:1 is high compression
lol you sure are retarded.

:^) you really need to do some research

>build super sleeper mini jet planr with heat seeking missiles
>kill all the cop drones in my area
>put cardboard cutouts of people in front of cop car station and auto braking ensures pedestrian safety first
>manual driven cars are banned
>huge ass street race for the rest of the night while the 400lb cops are running on foot to the highway

Kek i like this future

AY that's kinda high when you are running forced induction

where does the heat from a supercharger come from? i always hear people complain about it, but because they dont deal with exhaust like turbos do, where does that heat come from?

Friction from compressing air and of course some from the rotors flailing around at 6000 rpm

look at reviews for supercharged toybarus

>because a turbo will spool just by revving the engine without load.
You're a fucking idiot and need to turn in your man card.

Typical benchracer.

Idiot.. It's called an aftercooler.

the turbo fanboys itt don't know anything about cars that hasn't been told to them in an engineering explained video. sad!

>he doesnt build boost on the strip by brake torquing

lmoa

An aftercooler plate setup that mounts between the intake mani and the roots blower is about the same price as a non ebay intercooler setup

No.

Compressing air in and of itself causes it to heat up. Pressure and heat are both energy, and in gasses, they are partially interchangeable.

The main difference is that turbos 99 times out of 100 use an intercooler. On superchargers, which are generally mounted directly onto the engine, this is less common because it demands the use of an air-to-water intercooler for packaging reasons, and those cost significantly more. No intercooler equals hot charge air. Hot air means lower density. Lower density means less oxygen molecules. Hot air also means higher propensity to knock, further reducing boost pressure limits and therefore power.

Now, if you want to compare apples to apples, make sure both systems have intercoolers, unlike that memepic where they show a >100 hp difference.

Sure, the turbo will probably still make more net power when it reaches full boost, but the SC is going to have the more streetable torque curve, and potentially higher average hp over the entire rev range. From that point, you need to consider your gearing and application before you can call one better than the other.

so is it possible to remotely mount, say, an m90 roots blower and have it go through an air-to-air intercooler? how difficult would this be to pull off?

You also have to consider that a sc takes some power from the engine, so if you have the same whp the turboed engine isn´t producing as much power. This means that you need forged internals earlier if you go sc

Didint I just say it was from the compressing of air
And supercharger intercoolers are inefficient bulky and restrictive the best thing to do to avoid overheating and avoid knocking is water injection

I have never in my life read such a long winded load of tripe.

That poster is correct. Even before taking intercooling into account, positive displacement supercharging is a lot more prone to heat intake charge. Hell, even screw blowers are substantially more thermally efficient than roots blowers, let alone centrifugal pumps.
> the turbo will probably still make more net power when it reaches full boost, but the SC is going to have the more streetable torque curve
Er, no. Stop thinking all turbo engines drive like RB25s with a T88.
>and potentially higher average hp over the entire rev range
Is it opposite day? An exhaust driven turbo charger has the capacity to provide more boost over a wider rev range than a fixed gear pump, and does so in a way that's "on demand" with throttle application.

THE ONLY advantage a fixed gear positive displacement pump provides is an advantage at an arbitrary rev range (which is only relevant if you either have a stall converter that locks up at 1000, or if you have a manual and you lack the capacity to operate a throttle and a clutch at the same time) and an instantaneous response to throttle, as it's controlled by RPM and not throttle.

>inb4 this shitposter
This.
>superchargers
>competing
lel

Antilag is for cars with turbos as big as buckets, or people just trying to show off.

I just like N/A response time better.

And I know someone is going to respond to this saying "if you use the RIGHT turbo there's no lag."

There's always lag. There is no "right turbo" that magically doesn't need greater exhaust volume to spool, or bearings that are suspended in frictionless antimatter.

Turbos make better power, no doubt about it. But they don't feel as good to drive, and they never will.

>He thinks you can have "enough" torque.
>laughing_women.jpg

Lol, turbo is more fun to drive than na any day of the week
Is rather take an engine that throws me into the back of my seat and burns rubber through all gears at all rpms rather than a gutless engine I need to ring out to 5000rpm before I start moving
Bbbut muh miniscule difference in response!!

Did you mix up your sentences?

This.
NA>SC>TC

F20c makes 160hp at 6000rpm
A turbo f20c makes 300hp at 4000rpm
Figure out which is more fun to drive

In terms of which makes the least power to which makes the most, sure

wanna know how I know you've never driven a turbocharged car?

Wanna know how I know you've never driven a turbocharged car?
Go back to watching videos on YouTube of an sohc civic with a 80mm turbo and a shit plug and play tune

All else equal, turbo is dead last in terms of power delivery.

a more torquey powerband encourages lazy driving.
great for towing and comfy cruising but subjectively inferior for spirited driving

Nope, see >inb4 damage control

> All this bench racing

A daily a turbocharged car, and I used to daily an N/A car.

Turbo lag is not fun, and my car even has a twin scroll that spools at 2200 RPM, its still annoying to have literally no power until it spools.

They dont deliver power at any RPM, and most turbos even fall off in the high end, you fucking mongoloid, its literally physics.

Turbos deliver great peak power, but they aren't as nice to drive, and they literally never can be. Technology is doing it's best, and the fact that my turbo has as little lag as it does considering my cars 1.6l displacement is great, it's fantastic, but the car would be nicer to drive with a larger, N/A or supercharged engine, just because power delivery would be smoother, and more importantly, instant.

>posts a fucking Kia
Opinion discarded. Kys retarded cuckold

Turbos are literally superior to na and sc in every single aspect

>my car doesn't meet your cherrypicked criteria so I'm wrong

good argument fucktard

Nope. All else equal, a NA engine making 500hp will always have superior driveability and throttle response to a TC car making the same peak power.

Well your turbo 1.6 makes more power than an na or sc version of the engine would, and would offer superior power delivery
So whatever

A turbo will have broader powerband and make peak power much earlier
Retarded tripcuck

>Na and sc fags literally brain dead and think their stupid feelings are facts rather than opinions

Like I said, a larger N/A engine would be nicer to drive, but the turbo makes more peak power.

Did you read anything I said?

>let me tell you about the car you own based on what I learned from wikipedia
you fucking pleb go back to