Who disagrees with you? All I see on this thread is technical points and warnings.
He might be referring to me saying it’s fine to boost to 9lbs on that engine. I said it because Honda guys (I’m one of those!) have experience with boosting D and B-series Honda engines. They’ll take 9lbs easily all day long. Trouble is, a lot of people get addicted to the boost and want to go higher than that. At that point, you need to do some internals work to keep it reliable.
One of my Honda pals has a D16A6 in a CRX with over 180,000 miles on it and a JRSC pushing 9 lbs. With the other crap he’s done to the car, it’s insane for running the original motor. He routinely surprises much higher-class cars when he’s got it on the track.
Superchargers give better throttle response,but waste gas all the time. Small turbos dont make a tom of power but don’t hurt throttle response much. Big turbos make insane power but have a lot of lag and are really hard on an engine. Multiple small turbos can work very well especially with an intercooler and now you have spent much more than your car is worth and probable blown an engine or two while you are getting everything sorted out;
When in doubt, do both! VW has a ‘twincharger’ setup on a 1.4l gas engine in some markets, combining the good low end power of a supercharger with the better top end of the turbo:
But overall it looks like turbos have beat out superchargers, a number of formerly supercharged engines are now turbocharged, and most all new ones have a turbo variant.
The best use of Super Charging has got to be the Interceptor from “Mad Max”… He had it hooked up to a clutch, activated my a two speed rear gear switch attached to his shifter… Some Automotive porn for the day…
You guys are aware that there are at least three variation of “supercharger” that all have their pros and cons.
“turbos” ARE superchargers. They are ALL superchargers, it’s only a matter of where they derive their input power and how they compress the air that differentiates them. Any mechanical means of producing forced induction is technically a supercharger.
The conventional “supercharger” that everyone appears to be referring to here has at least three main variants; the roots style, twin screw and centrifugal. The centrifugal supercharger has the same fundamental issue of lag that the turbo-supercharger has.
Centrifugal superchargers have a lot of the benefits of the turbo supercharger without adding a lot of heat to the charge. The issue of parasitic drag due to being driven off the crank or cam isn’t really big until you hit high boost numbers. And contrary to what is often stated, turbo power is not “free”. The backpressure created by the device does have an impact on the engine (there is no free lunch) although it is less than that presented by modern designs of superchargers at certain rpms.
Which one best fits boils down to the application being served. For example, if you have a large displacement engine used to drag race, you might want to choose a twin-screw supercharger to help get that mass moving. If you have a smaller displacement engine used in circuit racing, you might want to use a centrifugal or turbo supercharger to improve high rpm horsepower. If your engine compartment is limited in room and cannot fit an intercooler or don’t want the added complexity, maybe a centrifugal supercharger is a better solution. These are not hard and fast rules, only some examples to illustrate. The entire system plays into it such as engine power band, gearing, weight, what you’re doing with the vehicle and so on. Turbos are not inherently superior to other forms of supercharger. They don’t necessarily outperform any other form either. They happen to fit certain applications better.
Oh, that. Unless someone has the class to come forward and say “I rated you with “disagree” because…” ignore the ratings. They’re stupid, and the tools of cowards who don’t want to face the possibility of being wrong.
TwinTurbo:
Yes, I know a turbo is technically a supercharger, but in common vernacular an exhaust-driven impeller supercharger is a turbo, and an electric or mechanically driven supercharger is a supercharger. If you call up a performance shop and ask for an exhaust-driven supercharger, they’ll sell you a turbo.
Everything else you said is correct. In his specific application, if he’s going to be racing it on real tracks, he wants a turbo. If he wants the kick-in-the-pants-fun-acceleration for normal driving or autocross, he wants a supercharger, specifically a Jackson Racing pulley-driven Supercharger since there’s a almost-direct fit kit for his engine, if he can find one.
I still think he should swap the engine first, though.
Not all superchargers provide boost all the time. The setups on GMs, Fords, etc use a vacuum pod operated flap to allow normally aspirated function until the pedal is floored; much like a turbocharger.
No matter which one you use you can pretty much count on a handful of snags to appear. You’ll just have to closely monitor the work and results and work your way through them.
And make double sure the EGR system is operating as it supposed to.
Thanks guys! Lots of good comments . . . don’t know which way to go yet . . . maybe I’ll look for V-tech motor and go with that . . maybe a supercharger for easier installation . . . thanks for all of your comments! Rocketman
Turbo systems are usually harder to install. They coast along not causing a loss in fuel economy until you put your boot in it. Contrary to posters here, the boost is not “free” it adds backpressure to the engine while under boost but provides more than it takes away. Superchargers spin by being driven by the crank and consume friction horsepower-always! If an intake bypass is not part of the kit, it will steal more than friction alone from the crank and lower your fuel mileage. It will be RIGHT THERE when you put your boot to the pedal while a turbo will lag a tiny bit. Both work better with an intercooler to cool the air after passing through the super or turbo-charger. Both require more fuel, different engine programming and both work better with lower compression. Both will shorten your engine life or, with enough boost, destroy it. Unless you are an engineer or tech VERY familiar with the workings of an fuel injected IC engine, buy a complete kit from a reputable source that includes fuel system upgrades and new computer programming. More and more cars are coming out using turbocharging on small engines as it can get the gas mileage of the small engine with the power of a larger engine when needed… See BMW, Audi and VW’s and Fords Eco-boost and nearly every Saab for the last 25 years!
in my opinion, superchargers are just better. even though they are not very reliable compared to turbos, turbochargers have a bunch of turbo lag while superchargers don’t. they are also easier to install. ultimately, in my opinion, superchargers are cooler than turbochargers
A Roots type blower is a reliable rugged beast,they will last for years under adverse conditions,look at the industrail apps and the decades they were used on GMC DIESEL engines(the screaming Jimmys)-Kevin
if you call up a performance shop and ask for an exhaust-driven supercharger, they’ll sell you a turbo.
If I was going to ask, I’d call it a turbo too. But as I mentioned it’s technically a turbo supercharger- shortened to turbo. If I inquired using functional descriptions, I’d also ask for an ignition driven plug
@kmccune-
I’ve been out of the drag racing scene for some time but when I started, roots were everywhere. Back then it was carbs and large displacement engines. I lived through the transition from roots to twin screws becoming more popular as EFI came of age and the desire to keep it all under the hood. The significant heat issue with roots type is not nearly as bad with twins either. For the street, everyone (GM guys) was vying for the superchargers from the Buick Regals that were scrapped. You needed to be hooked up to even have a chance at one they were being snapped up so fast. Later, the centrifugal chargers became more prevalent as they could be tucked into just about any compartment and have a sleeper requiring the least modification to the car.
Never used one by them but that looks like the beast in question! Whipple, Vortech are manfrs I recall but there are quite a few companies that made/make them.
Thanks twin turbo,everybody did not dislike this look,some rodders preferred it-Kevin(seen a 31 or such Rod the other day with a Weind blower(supercharger)and Edelbrock heads on a flathead 8-looked pretty good-Kevin
The Judson was an eccentric vane type supercharge that required its own total loss “Marvel Mystery” oil supply to lubricate the bearings and vanes. Rumor was the vanes were made of something like Masonite.
An interesting article. Just the pictures are worth a look. How far we’ve come. Maybe.
I came here for an argument!
