Supercharger Vs Turbocharger
 

I have been looking at buying a turbocharger or a supercharger for the V6 3.8 liter the turbocharge is only 380 dollars cheaper. I have been looking at the FFF turbocharger and the RKS supercharger wich one is better and also do they sound the same i really like how the turbochargers sound i dont know what it is i like the hissing and the air coming out of the blow out valves but wich one will be better and wich one can u actually hear in the car and do they both use gauges? :confused: :confused: :confused: :confused:

get a turbo.

but to answer your questions...they both have that hissing sound, its a blow off valve and both supercharger and turbochargers have them. the exhaust sound is throatier with a turbo. and both could use gauges, but you have to buy one. its simply a gauge hooked to a boost MAP.

So turbo is better?
 

why do u say turbo? I try to get ahold of FFF but they wont give me to much input just price wont give me any info on it i been to site but i want to make sure on shipping and payment options wich one is easier to install? :confused:

well tiago builds them by hand, so theres a wait list. i say turbo because a $3500 turbo would add more power than a $3500 supercharger. ease of installation...uh...depends who you are. me? i could do it no problem. you? what kind of experience do you have tearing the whole front of your car apart :nana:

The good thing about turbos is you don't have to buy all the parts at once. You can buy then at different times so you wouldn't be shelling out 3500 in a day... I talk to this guy on AIM about turbos and hes very informative. I forget his s/n right now be he as well as his friend has put a turbo on their v6's i believe.. Well I know atleast one of the cars is a v6 if not both..

Oh yea and the turbo kit at FFF is 2,500 for the base kit..

if you ever find his sn, you should pm me it.. I would like to talk to someone about turbos, because I plan to get one on the future..

In simplistic terms, the engine functions as an air pump. The more air and fuel that is pumped through, the more power you can make. In order to pump the air, pressure on the intake side must be higher relative to pressure going out the exhaust. In a naturally aspirated engine, valve timing events are used to create a pressure. Since you are reading this guide, you are probably not interested in naturally aspirated engines, so we can leave it at that. That said, we can all agree that it makes no sense to build a naturally aspirated performance engine. From a performance standpoint, it would generally make sense to use some means to pressurize the intake, while using some means to decrease the pressure in the exhaust path. The second part is easy; almost everyone and their brother has some type of exhaust work. The first job is a little trickier. Fortunately we have superchargers (and turbos) to save the day.

A crank driven supercharger will most definitely increase the pressure on the intake side of the engine. Since it is limited to the intake track, it will not adversely affect the pressure in the exhaust. The pressure on the intake side should always be greater than the pressure in the exhaust. However, power doesn’t come free, and you must use some of that newfound torque to spin the supercharger. How much that takes is calculable, but is purely academic because significant power is netted. In the case of positive displacement superchargers, boost can be had at very low RPMs, and in the case of the centrifugal and screw supercharger, good efficiency can be had. Other reasons to choose a supercharger are that the retrofit to an NA car should be smoother because there are no changes to be made to the exhaust path. The power curve is predictable because boost is largely dependent on RPM of the motor and not some less tangible factor such as engine load.

Now why would anyone want a turbo? Turbo systems are more complex because they require revision to the intake and exhaust sides of the motor. From the air pump standpoint, at first glance they seem to be inferior to a supercharger as you are placing a restriction in the exhaust flow path (i.e. the turbine). And given what we know of centrifugal compressor efficiency at low RPMs, there may be a significant portion of the rev range before the turbo will reach threshold and begin to create boost (this is what “lag” is). However the relative independence from engine RPM is the turbo’s greatest advantage over any other supercharger type. Boost can be reset with ease, and therefore tunability is also greatly increased as compared to a crank driven unit. While the adiabatic efficiency of the compressor may not be as great as that of a screw type supercharger, the drive mechanism is much more efficient, as a turbo relies on utilization of largely wasted kinetic energy in the exhaust gases. All of this combines to form a versatile, tunable unit that has the potential to make more power than a crank driven supercharger.

So a turbo must be superior to a crank driven supercharger, right? If that was the case the crank driven supercharger would have died out long ago. For all out power the turbo reigns supreme, but life unfortunately is full of compromises. Packaging is a huge concern during a retrofit of forced induction onto an NA motor, and in that instance the crank driven supercharger has the turbo beat handily. The user must decide on his or her priorities and decide from there.

I am fond of my supercharger. I got it used for 1,500 and put it in in about two hours. I just need hp tuners to arrive and finally get it tuned right. I put about 8000 miles on it so far, and no problems. The first two weeks I had to do about a daily belt tightening, but it finally quit stretching. If I did it again, I doubt I would turbo, just too much involved for my tastes. But thats just me.

TURBO's OWN

:nana:

tiago has 2 set of pipes left he not making kits anymore the pipe are on ebay right now for $350 plus $75 ship from ther you can buy the rest of the stuff on your own