What's the point of turbos if superchargers are better and cost less?

they sound good

Oh wow of course yes your anecdotal evidence is the only thing that matters in the world

Superchargers sound annoying and sound like screaming babies

It’s simple, a turbo makes an engine more thermally efficient, it uses the force generated by exhaust gases to induce more air, so it wastes less. A supercharger is a direct alternative to more displacement, that doesn’t nearly increase thermal effiency as much as a turbo

youtube.com/watch?v=fq2ekzptguo

Only off boost do you get better mpg from the tiny 1.5l overstrung engine. On boost you get shit mpg and mediocre power
The best of both worlds!

I've always been of the persuasion that if it's American, specifically American v8, supercharger it. Roots style, twin screw kenne bells come to mind. You get the "extra displacement" on an already large displacement engine, plus no lag, it's instantaneous as if it was N/A, not to mention the godly lower end torque and dat whine.

How are they better if they require engine power to build pressure whereas a turbine just uses exhaust gases which would have been waste anyway.

The turbo is more efficient.

*lags*
*self destructs*
*lags again*
*over heats*
*wears out bearings*
*lags while overheating*

you are being delusional again, turbos are superior

Didn't the new ZR1 beat this thing in a race at VIR or something though?

yeah, its only change from the street version was a racing seat + harness than made it non street legal and that was it
but lets face it, the zr1 beat the ford gt, racing seats or not

...

My Nigga that is the realest shit i ever heard

fuming with rage

must suck to be a GM fangirl

Im sorry but the info in the OP is blatantly false.

Supers are parasitic and generally gain less while being less efficient.

Why do you think all car manufactures use turbos almost exclusivity?

The only mass produced cars I can think of off the top of my head for supers would be the GM 3.8 cars of the 90's/early 2000's and the Cobalt SS when it had a super.

Wheres my cheap super for my 5.0 explorer huh? Oh $5000? Sure that makes sense..... like never.... absurd.

You can easily get a turbo for a 1/10th of what most people charge for a super.

Same story with miatas.... supers costing a kidney....

Better than the evidence you presented (none)

You're a poorfag. It's obvious. Superchargers are better. Torque is instantly and always available which makes driving infinitely more fun, especially in the city. Turbos still have horrific lag except on extremely high end cars where they are electrically pre-spooled.

I'd take the availability of power and the slight parasitic nature of them vs a turbo any fucking day. They also sound manly while a turbo sounds like shit for poorfags in their riced shitboxes.

Mediocre power? Have you ever watched a 1320 vid in your life? Its all turbos, they have a higher top end. For daily driving when you don't need power they get better fuel economy by staying out of boost. The also utilize mostly wasted energy to produce boost so they dont have a parasitic relationship on the crank like SCs do. Lastly they sometimes get shaft play but all you have to do is swap out the turbo, often times on its own is pretty cheap. In the same amount of time that your turbo will need to be rebuilt a decent blower will have fucked your engine mains due to the increased friction on the top half of the bearing from the belt tension.

Guys its simple, turbos are the better route for pure power and drivability. What could you want more than a reasonable 400hp for a daily driver that you can turn up to 800 just by planting your foot. All the streetability and economy you could ask for.

As a side note nobody on this fucking site actually has any experience building engines

Some people don't want to be cucked by their pedal. Why not have power everywhere, always? There's a reason pushrods and blowers and popular.

youre either a kid or a troll because the first post in the thread you said supers were cheaper, now youre getting called out because theyre way more expensive and so youre telling people theyre too poor. youve never worked on a car in your life kid. I bet youre in highscool still

how does it feel to be delusional?

Because you'll get 5mpg and its impossible to drive. but you wouldnt know, youve never driven anything with power kek.

Yeah and exactly how long does it take for that giant fucking turbo to spool up and make that power? Lol.

Turbo's are great for straight line performance when you have a long patch of asphault ahead of you, but a supercharger blows them out of the water in every other scenario, especially on the race track when you actually have to brake, turn, and accelerate constantly. While you're still spooling I'm two turns ahead and getting further ahead.

Fuck this board is poorfag benchracer central. 5k for a supercharger is not a lot of money to vastly improve a car. If I was still poor I'd get a brand new BRZ, put new wheels and tires on it for more grip and a supercharger. It would be an amazing car for under $35k.

the turbo makes more power down low because it doesn't have parasitic loss

youtube.com/watch?v=eA5kj1lSMBo

watch the dyno at 2:34

you are a dumb, inbred retard, kill yourself before you reproduce

>Turbos still have horrific lag except on extremely high end
m8 on my honda fucking civic the turbo kicks in at 1800 rpm if you push the pedal to the floor

manufactures use turbos for emissions bro

>What is power band
>Enthusiasts caring about mpg
Faggot
>Admitting you're just a shitty driver

Based Scotty agrees
youtu.be/2bIFTtvy5v4
>Turbo cucks btfo

>Turbo
>Improve mpg
Pick one

poorer fuel economy and they cost more for a manufacturer to produce and install on a factory car

Lol youve provided even less evidence than him!

>If I was still poor, I’d buy this car I can’t currently afford and do mods I can’t currenty afford to it to prove a point I’m very bad at making
Holy benchracer batman

>a decent blower will have fucked your engine mains due to the increased friction on the top half of the bearing from the belt tension.

Well you certainly don't have any experience building engines because that's shit you pulled right out of your ass.

neither do you, because superchargers does increase the stress on the main bearings

posting images of yunnick doesn't automatically makes you knowledgeable faggo

It increases stress on the mains due to increased cylinder pressures that come with any engine you're making good power in but he (or you are probably him) specifically said because of BELT TENSION this happens. So you wanna try again or keep talking bullshit?

Y'all niggas benchracing like mad. NA is the way to go. Let's not pretend any of you have a +300whp vehicle anyway. Half of you ride the bus and the other half are kids with $3k civics.
Owning and maintaining anything with a lot of work in it on a day to day basis will inevitably drain your wallet and your will to live.

except belt tension and harmonics DOES increase main bearing stress faggot

youtube.com/watch?v=oyeotHRZ-XI
>6:30 to 6:50

I'm pretty sure Tom Nelson knows more than your faggot ass about building an engine or two

now kill yourself for being such a clueless faggot

Number one he's referring specifically to a ribbed serpentine. With how long those are when you incorporate a supercharger they have different sections "a lot going on with that" that have different resonate frequencies that in HIS OPINION beat the shit out of the bearings. He doesn't ever mention tension.

Swing and a miss.

imagine being half as retarded as this guy

>this much damage control

nice try, you are wrong, superchargers do increase the stress on the main bearings, turbos don't

this is a fact, you can keep being delusional all you want, but Tom Nelson > You

>what's the point of turbos if superchargers are better and cost less?
>2018
>being this retarded

>he literally does not mention belt tension as being the cause of the bearing damage with supercharger use but a different concept entirely

Where does he say belt tension is what's causing it?

>still trying

I am so sorry

nelson's referring to those aftermarket roots setups with those horrible flappy belts. doesn't apply to properly engineered factory setups.

except he is talking about his own supercharger set ups dumbass

>NRE
>not properly engineered
delusional

>still believing that cranking a few extra pounds of force into a belt is enough to cause rebuild level bearing damage

Okay hombre, make sure you don't tighten your idler too much if you replace your alternator or A/C pump- Could cause some serious damage like that!

This. Big turbos are very laggy and useless. A supercharger on the other hand, silky smooth, predictable power delivery, reliable and sexy.

poor guy, even after being proved wrong by one of the biggest names in the industry, he keeps being delusional

see you are delusional

Turbos are easier to fit under the bonnet, meaning tuners don't have to pay the bodyshop for a custom hood scoop that looks like arse

STOP RUINING MY THREAD S/O/VIET!!
SUPERCHARGERS ARE BETTER!!
ARGH I HATE YOU!!

>turbo i3 vs na i4
>slower when the turbo doesn't kick in
>worse economy when it does
It doesn't improve MPG, it just makes the EPA think it does.

Supercharger is enjoying duck a l'orange atop a skyscraper with a Victoria secret model, both prepared by a Michelin chef.

Turbo is fighting a homeless bum over first pick in the garbage bin at you local mcdonalds.

TRUE
R
U
E

DAT
A
T