Superchargers VS. Turbochargers

[Mopar 68]

Well a few others and i had a debate on whether or not superchargers/turbochargers were better than the other

All aspects came into play whether its DRAG RACING, STREET RACING, TRACK RACING, even EVERYDAY DRIVING.

performance structures and torque ratio's along with an engines bore and stroke...the engines capacity and reliable bhp are all variables on the subject..

an example..lets say my car...its a Chrysler charger...(Australian)...1968 White Knight Special..its specs are..426 magnum V8 block extensive work such as overbored.resleeved, enlarged valves, dome top pistons, 4.1/4' oversized lumpy cams, 5000RPM stall, modified 727 torqeflite box, 8.3/4' chrysler diff shortened n tubbed out, and on top of all that she is wearing a crown...a crown in which happens to be a internally cooled defined weiand 920remote S/Charger, thats 920CFMx8...producing an immaculate 1150rbhp...rbhp = realiable bhp....

I can pull a 1/4 in 7.6 seconds....on a track it is quite worthy of racing...over a 5.6km track pulls outstanding results of 2.32.00 without passing 6000RPM...

On the aspect of everyday driving...it chews far to much fuel...so thats out of the question...

picture below
http://img49.imageshack.us/img49/5921/mycar1ea6.jpg

----------------------------------------------------------------

Ok so all is good...lets compare this to an later model car weilding a turbo/twin turbo kit..lets say..a supra or skyline for example...the run entirely on electrics...thats a down fall...if your power source fails lets be frank ya screwed..ballbearing turbo's...wear and tear gets the best of you...plus..untill a certain vaccum pressure/RPM is reached...the turbo is practically useless...but i havent drivin a turbo'd motorcar so i couldnt tell its performance...ive seen them in action and i will give credit where credit is due...they do perform quite well..but only at mid-top RPM...

But anyhow...id like to see some people comment on this...its quite intriguing to see other peoples opinions...

 

[the Interceptor]

1. What does this have to do with GT5?
2. Do you want to discuss your car, or SC vs. TC?
3. Welcome to GTPlanet!

Regards
the Interceptor

 

[ekr2940]

they do perform quite well..but only at mid-top RPM...

in racing isnt this the area thats used the most?

 

[Mopar 68]

in racing isnt this the area thats used the most?

yes but as i said in all aspects...traack, street, and drag, even normal everyday driving

 

[throttlehappy]

very nice car!
id probably go supercharged if i had a choice, not that id say no to a twin turbo though theres just somthing about that whine and having huge amounts of power/torque the moment you plant the foot plus "supercharged" just sounds so damn cool! when i finally get an ls1 i hope to put a blower on it down the track

now i just want to go out and buy one, damn you!

 

[Mopar 68]

1. What does this have to do with GT5?
2. Do you want to discuss your car, or SC vs. TC?
3. Welcome to GTPlanet!

Regards
the Interceptor

well im sure ya think twas a clever remark...but lets say this...this post has quite alot to do with the GT series...Realistic as u may think the performance ratio in the GT series is...its way off key...for most cars S/chargers arent able to be equiped...and then there is the issue of the over power b/s that a turbo on the series emitts more bhp from an engin than a S/C does...so ya this has a lot to do with the game...

And as for wanted to discuss my car...it was merely an example unto how the game portrays the different methods of power amplification wrongly...so may i advise you to read the posts a lil more accurately before commenting

thank you and have a nice day

 

[Mopar 68]

very nice car!
id probably go supercharged if i had a choice, not that id say no to a twin turbo though theres just somthing about that whine and having huge amounts of power/torque the moment you plant the foot plus "supercharged" just sounds so damn cool! when i finally get an ls1 i hope to put a blower on it down the track

now i just want to go out and buy one, damn you!

LOL well im glad ya like it but as i said its just an example...

im glad u made a comment on the subject unlike others that come in here n bag on it...thanks for ya input...

 

[Mopar 68]

as for everyone else who wants to bag on the fact that i used my car as an example...i wish to say somethin...dont waste ya damn time writtin if u aint gonna comment on the subject....if u cant say somethin worth readin with some sort of validation to the title of this thread...then dont say anythin at all ok...this is a ligitimate debate on the performance aspect that GT hold on their series...its not accurate and needs fixing...unless u got somethin creditable to say...i advise u dont type in here at all

 

[the Interceptor]

...this post has quite alot to do with the GT series...Realistic as u may think the performance ratio in the GT series is...its way off key...for most cars S/chargers arent able to be equiped...and then there is the issue of the over power b/s that a turbo on the series emitts more bhp from an engin than a S/C does...so ya this has a lot to do with the game...

agreed, but why with GT5 in specific? You're saying that the game is off when it comes to SC and TC, but GT5 is not even out yet. So, you must be referring to a previous version. And you didn't mention the game in your first post, so I asked if you want to discuss real life SC/TC, or the ones in the game.

...so may i advise you to read the posts a lil more accurately before commenting

Thanks, I'll do my best in the future. So long, you might probably want to read the forum rules, which clearly state that you shouldn't double post and are supposed to use proper writing.

Regards
the Interceptor

 

[Mopar 68]

intercetpor.

u still failed to comment on the debate at hand...and yes i am refering to all previous editions of GT and the assumption that GT5 will take on those same aspects...which happen to be unaccurate and false

 

[the Interceptor]

Gran Turismo is off when it comes to SC and TC figures. Some of that is down to the fact that you can't equip every car with them, and some that you have no chance to alter any settings, such as boost pressure. Still, I've never seen a game that is as technically close to the reality and versatile with tuning as this is. In real life, I'm a NA man.

Happy now?

And the fact that I was offtopic, or rather asking you what you want to discuss, doesn't mean that you can disregard the forum rules.

Regards
the Interceptor

 

[ExigeEvan]

intercetpor.

u still failed to comment on the debate at hand...and yes i am refering to all previous editions of GT and the assumption that GT5 will take on those same aspects...which happen to be unaccurate and false

Okay for a start, I'm sensing some relly strong attitude problems here.

Interceptor has a point. Your first post was about your car, and everyday cars. And yet you never even mentioned a GT car or scenario.

You also talk about

DRAG RACING, STREET RACING, TRACK RACING, even EVERYDAY DRIVING.

Ummm, street racing and Everday driving aren't in GT4, and I doubt GT5. Unless you like pootling around New York in a prius at 30mph that is.

So really make up your mind. Make this thread more GT specific, or shift it yourself to motoring in general. Though I'm pretty sure this has been done before.
________________________________________________________________________________________
Anyway, my preference is a supercharger. I prefer the gradual power and I think a SC goes much better with a V8 set up, though I do think TC match 4 and 6's better.

Turbo's and SC can both work well in everyday life. A turbo can require such a high level of revs to hit boost it can probably be avoided day-to-day. A superhcarger is usually for mid range work but has a more gradual boost so is fine day-today IMO.

Drag racing, has to be turbo. The high revs mean a SC is pointless.

 

[Sonzilla]

lol Mopar has personal issues regarding TC's.
You think ya slick huh mate.

 

[Mopar 68]

Drag racing, has to be turbo. The high revs mean a SC is pointless.

wrong...turbo's have no use at low RPM so really think about it unless ur gonna idle at 6000 or so RPM at the start line ur wasting ur time...superchargers however are designed to create maximum power thru out 0 to maximum RPM...the biggest S/charger that i have ever heard of personaly is 1460..that 1,460 CFM...CFM = cubic feet per minute...1,460 cubic feet per minute per cylinder....there is not a turbo in existance capable of that same power output...

as for talking about my car at the beginning...i said it once n ima say it again....it was used as an example to how wrogfully power amplifications for each of the available power applications are portrayed in the previous releases of GT...and how it is pressumed that GT5 will take on those same false aspects of realistic performance....do not waste ur time commenting on the fact that my car in particular was used as that example for i could have used victor bray's 57 chev dragster or Craig lowndes V8 supercar...it makes no difference

 

[Mopar 68]

well of course sonzilla the fact remains the bhp and mere performance of the vehicles in GT are so exagerated its not funny...the realistic performance should b put in place as for the accurate power increase to whether its turbo or S?charged to be honest it really annoys me..

 

[ExigeEvan]

wrong...turbo's have no use at low RPM so really think about it unless ur gonna idle at 6000 or so RPM at the start line ur wasting ur time...

I understadn that, but you would certainly be sticking to the higher revs when drag racing, meaning the TC would be more effective.

superchargers however are designed to create maximum power thru out 0 to maximum RPM...the biggest S/charger that i have ever heard of personaly is 1460..that 1,460 CFM...CFM = cubic feet per minute...1,460 cubic feet per minute per cylinder....there is not a turbo in existance capable of that same power output...

AFAIK superchargers don't give the kind of peak boost a turbo will generally. SC will give you more base and mid power than a turbo as there is no lag, but I don't think they provide significant peak power like turbos, just the same boost as they would at the mid range.

If I'm wrong I apoligise, I mearly know the basics of SC and TC.

as for talking about my car at the beginning...i said it once n ima say it again....it was used as an example to how wrogfully power amplifications for each of the available power applications are portrayed in the previous releases of GT...and how it is pressumed that GT5 will take on those same false aspects of realistic performance....do not waste ur time commenting on the fact that my car in particular was used as that example for i could have used victor bray's 57 chev dragster or Craig lowndes V8 supercar...it makes no difference

Okay then let me tell you how you should have gone about it if you were doing a GT thread.

You would have started GT and attained a doubles of some cars. You then would have turbocharged one, and supercharged the other and noted the HP increase. Then possibly done a performance test, 1/4 mile, circuit of a track, top speed etc.

Repeat with another car model see if results are consistent.

Then you would have had a rant how Turbo chargers produce significantly more power in GT and GT doesn't give SC the boost properties they should have.

Then as an example you would have posted your car to show a real world comparison, and possibly taken a similair TC car aswell, though with your modifications that could be difficult.

 

[Famine]

Mopar - you've been told publicly AND PMed by another moderator with regards to multiple successive posting and your use of contractive English.

Desist.

Also:

DRAG RACING, STREET RACING, TRACK RACING, even EVERYDAY DRIVING.

Since Gran Turismo only has one of those things (and an excuse for a second), this isn't really GT-related, so I'm moving it to Cars in General.

And you will not use these forums to discuss street racing.

Oh, and a photograph of a handwritten sign with "I love GTPlanet" on your car would go down nicely too, before people start claiming BS.

 

[Sonzilla]

well of course sonzilla the fact remains the bhp and mere performance of the vehicles in GT are so exagerated its not funny...the realistic performance should b put in place as for the accurate power increase to whether its turbo or S?charged to be honest it really annoys me..

I don't think it's exaggerated at all I feel that GT4 was very moderate as far as tunning numbers of course. Compared to previous GT games it was slightly exaggerated indeed. But so far GT isn't a Drag racing game it's mainly a Gran Touring game get it GT. Seriously I have faith that the next GT will be allot more accurate as far as Hp&Tq are concerned.
Now I feel exactly what you really feel and that in GT4 SC's were very scarce and taken very lightly. I'm disappointed as well. But the fact remains that you won't find to many SC's on Road going cars especially the sweet looking Chevy you showed with the huge blower on top in the other post. I know that's what your looking for in GT5 huh. Shoot I wish they would throw drag in the next title.

 

[Mopar 68]

Mopar - you've been told publicly AND PMed by another moderator with regards to multiple successive posting and your use of contractive English.

Desist.

Also:



Since Gran Turismo only has one of those things (and an excuse for a second), this isn't really GT-related, so I'm moving it to Cars in General.

And you will not use these forums to discuss street racing.

Oh, and a photograph of a handwritten sign with "I love GTPlanet" on your car would go down nicely too, before people start claiming BS.

u show me where i have posted consequtive posts since i read the mrivate messege i was sent and about the way i type well if you had have told me about that then it would have been taken into account

as for nothing to do with GT u telling me that GT5 or what ever they wish to call it isnt going to have any of these driving modes?...please tell me exactly how you would know that for sure concidering its still being created...

but yes since i only read the pm i got stating about the 7 posts i made no more than 20 minutes ago and havent done it since...i wish for you tyo show me...please be my guest

 

[Jay]

wrong...turbo's have no use at low RPM so really think about it unless ur gonna idle at 6000 or so RPM at the start line ur wasting ur time...superchargers however are designed to create maximum power thru out 0 to maximum RPM...the biggest S/charger that i have ever heard of personaly is 1460..that 1,460 CFM...CFM = cubic feet per minute...1,460 cubic feet per minute per cylinder....there is not a turbo in existance capable of that same power output...

I just read a few snips from your posts and you are so so misinformed.

Just as a silly example, you dont think these can flow 1,460CFM?

Oh BTW "superchargers however are designed to create maximum power thru out 0 to maximum RPM."

0 RPM? Hahaha

an example..lets say my car...its a Chrysler charger...(Australian)...1968 White Knight Special..its specs are..426 magnum V8 block extensive work such as overbored.resleeved, enlarged valves, dome top pistons, 4.1/4' oversized lumpy cams, 5000RPM stall, modified 727 torqeflite box, 8.3/4' chrysler diff shortened n tubbed out, and on top of all that she is wearing a crown...a crown in which happens to be a internally cooled defined weiand 920remote S/Charger, thats 920CFMx8...producing an immaculate 1150rbhp...rbhp = realiable bhp....

I can pull a 1/4 in 7.6 seconds....on a track it is quite worthy of racing...over a 5.6km track pulls outstanding results of 2.32.00 without passing 6000RPM...

I don't believe a word. Prove it!

 

[G.T]

but yes since i only read the pm i got stating about the 7 posts i made no more than 20 minutes ago and havent done it since...i wish for you tyo show me...please be my guest

Posts 6, 7 and 8 and posts 14 and 15 in this thread. Don't say that isn't double/triple posting...

 

[Mopar 68]

I don't believe a word. Prove it!

here you go
http://img146.imageshack.us/img146/4476/mycar1tt8.jpg
thats my pride and joy

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

G T read what i said correctly before making a comment...i said since i read the pm only 20 minutes ago show me where i have done it since....i am new to this so i was not aware...untill i read the pm i got, and since then havent done it

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Also this is thread is not for your opinion on whether or not i have messed up during my attempt to make a legitimate arguement...

this thread is for your personal opinion of the power output difference of power amplifications/applications and your personal preference

 

[ExigeEvan]

here you go
http://img146.imageshack.us/img146/4476/mycar1tt8.jpg
thats my pride and joy

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

G T read what i said correctly before making a comment...i said since i read the pm only 20 minutes ago show me where i have done it since....i am new to this so i was not aware...untill i read the pm i got, and since then havent done it

That's not proof.

Proof is putting I love GTP on a piece of paper, put that on the bonet then take a photo.

 

[Dave A]

Superchargers and turbo chaargers both provide power over different rev bands, both can increase power over the entire range, (barring 0 revs) but a turbo will provide in a relative comparison more power in the upper bands than a supercharger will and a supercharger will provide more power in the lower bands. Ideal setups have in the past used both a supercharger and a turbo together, using the supercharger to create the power while the turbo spools up. Track races opt for no forced induction or for turbochargers because they spend most of the time in the higher revs, where a turbo will create more power. Both have pro's and con's, also you ahve the characteristics they provide altering the way the cars engine responds and delivers power and in production cars thats an important factor.

 

[Danny]

That's not proof.

Proof is putting I love GTP on a piece of paper, put that on the bonet then take a photo.

I'm going to give him the benefit of the doubt.

Nice ride!

 

[G.T]

here you go
http://img146.imageshack.us/img146/4476/mycar1tt8.jpg
thats my pride and joy

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

G T read what i said correctly before making a comment...i said since i read the pm only 20 minutes ago show me where i have done it since....i am new to this so i was not aware...untill i read the pm i got, and since then havent done it

Yep, I noticed. I was just basing it on what Famine said to you over an hour ago here. I guess you never saw it.

Also, that isn't proof. This is proof. A piece of paper on the engine or other various parts of the car with GTPlanet written on it will be suffecient enough. The picture you posted I could nick from the internet and edit in Photoshop whatever I want on it. Not good enough.

 

[Mopar 68]

That's not proof.

Proof is putting I love GTP on a piece of paper, put that on the bonet then take a photo.

dude...i was asked for a picture of my dodge charger...i provided...

the fact is your getting off the subject of conversation...stick to the threads title otherwise make no comment...or is that to difficult for you?

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

G T
why exactly would i want to lie about my possesions?
have you a guilt for thats what you do?..i have a g/f who watches me day in and day out work with motorcars, she also knows what i own the fact that u need proof or acreditation shows your inability to provide yourself...

 

[Dave A]

I could just dig up a random picure of a McLaren F1 off the net and claim it's mine or take a pic of my neighbors Porsche and claim it's mine. The only way to prove it is yours is by putting a hand written message on it with the bonent open of on the inside of the windscreen or something similar to that, with the naote saying something you've been asked to write, like Hello GTP or similar. We all do it when we claim to own a nice car, you don't have to do that, but no-one will believe you. It's not much effort to just take a picture of the car with a note on it.

 

[Jay]

here you go
http://img146.imageshack.us/img146/4476/mycar1tt8.jpg
thats my pride and joy

Ok for starters there is NO proof that is yours. More pictures and with proof as Famine said.

G T
why exactly would i want to lie about my possesions?
have you a guilt for thats what you do?..i have a g/f who watches me day in and day out work with motorcars, she also knows what i own the fact that u need proof or acreditation shows your inability to provide yourself...

Many people come here and lie about their possesions but atleast many other members lies make some sence unlike yours.

its a Chrysler charger...(Australian)...1968 White Knight Special

You said your car is a Australian Chrysler Charger

*Chysler Charger was not sold In Australia until 1970-71.
*That Charger you pictured was a 1966-67 American charger (not 68).
*The Australia white knight special was sold in 1976.
*Wheres the front number plate?
*You said here that your car is a Dodge Charger??

 

[Tornado]

Not to mention the photo was "taken" in Janurary of '07. It just get's better and better.