Turbo or Supercharger opinions

Turbo and Supercharger discussion
 Reply
User avatar

Turbo or Supercharger opinions

By newbie101
- Mon Mar 08, 2010 1:40 am #179746 Hey, I have a d16z6. I've read into turbos on these engines, and quite frankly I don't have the time or resources to do all the tapping of the oil pan and what not. What about a supercharger? What exactly would it entail to put one on? I've heard they just replace the intake manifold. Any opinions would be greatly appreciated. Thanks in advance.
User avatar

By JUICE
- Mon Mar 08, 2010 2:05 am #179750 turbo > supercharger


take your time. research turbod16.com and just piece it together



and what part of cincy? :woot:
User avatar

Re: part of cincy

By chrono404
- Mon Mar 08, 2010 2:40 am #179759
newbie101 wrote:Reading. You? Just curious, why turbo > supercharger?


Turbos can make more powers then superchargers, It will be colder air then a super charger, If you make a kit it will be much cheaper. Bad ass bad off valve sound.

Check out Turbod16, It is full of awesome info and will help you come to a decision.
User avatar

By forcefedEG
- Mon Mar 08, 2010 2:08 pm #179858 turbos make power from your exaust stream (basicly), and exaust is a paracitic loss off the engine... so its basicly free horsepower, (other than buying the kit) a turbo dosent rob power to make power, where a jackson charger dose, sometimes this power loss is very minimal compared to what you make, a super charger is most efficent at low rpms.. an hondas make power at high rpms, and i have heard of belt slipping issues on jacksons, but this is normally due to over boost or not useing the right belt, but i have been told jacksons have a heatsoak issue wich will rob power, unless you have a LHT equiped jackson with the water cooler, i had one of those but never ran it, i traded it to a friend so im still not sure exactly how good it dose, unless you were considering a pro-charger, because there basicly a belt driven turbo... wich in that case id say go for it because you would be very different from anyone else and for that id give you :thumb: :thumb: but there cost is sometimes more than a decent turbo kit :(
User avatar

By forcefedEG
- Mon Mar 08, 2010 2:10 pm #179860
JUICE wrote:nice. I'm right by Xavier/Norwood




ride in a built, turbo'd hatch and your mind will be made up :lol:


x2 agreed! rode in a boys turbo gsr hatch on like 13 psi, that sealed it for me!
User avatar

By chrono404
- Mon Mar 08, 2010 3:38 pm #179876
forcefedEG wrote:turbos make power from your exaust stream (basicly), and exaust is a paracitic loss off the engine... so its basicly free horsepower.


Its not "free" horsepower anymore then a supercharger is free horsepower. the super charger robs power off the crank to make more power, If you had good flowing headers your exhaust would flow better then if had a Turbo sitting there. There is no "free" horsepower.

Going with a turbo setup will be better bang for your buck then on a supercharger. Want instant power? Get a small turbo. Want big power? get a big turbo.
User avatar

By forcefedEG
- Mon Mar 08, 2010 3:53 pm #179881
chrono404 wrote:
forcefedEG wrote:turbos make power from your exaust stream (basicly), and exaust is a paracitic loss off the engine... so its basicly free horsepower.


Its not "free" horsepower anymore then a supercharger is free horsepower. the super charger robs power off the crank to make more power, If you had good flowing headers your exhaust would flow better then if had a Turbo sitting there. There is no "free" horsepower.

Going with a turbo setup will be better bang for your buck then on a supercharger. Want instant power? Get a small turbo. Want big power? get a big turbo.


"free hosepower" is a bad term i shouldnt have used it for this purpose, but i dont nessecarily agree wit the term, but a turbo takes no power to make power (despite the small disruption in the exhaust stream)... this topic has probally been beat to death on every forum on the internet about most any car, and i dont see it ever stopping, its a matter of opinion and thats all it comes down to really, i dont really want to beat this topic to death agin... but i do i disagree about the freeer flowing exhaust thing on the super charger car, but honestly whenever anything makes boost the intake charge and the exhaust charge will be "forced out" but anyway everyone has an opinon and thats what makes places like this great lol but i wont lie a supercharger is an instant burst of low rpm power, ive rode in turbo cars, jrsc equipped cars and a procharger equipped car, with the right parts and the right tune all 3 will make good power... :thumb:

By stubrun
- Mon Mar 08, 2010 5:34 pm #179907 Image
sorry couldnt resist :lol:
User avatar

By ikon
- Tue Mar 09, 2010 2:23 am #180022 it all depends on what u want...... turbos run the high risk of oil leaks ( all the lines and tapping ). superchargers make less power than a " big turbo " but they r way more dependable. installation is way easir than a turbo and despite what people say all turbos have lag. id say supercharger for the track and road coarses and turbos for drag and street light runs.

nd belt slippage is most offen times attributed to wrong installation not over boost. just do it right nd youll be fine. plus with a trubo its easy to get carried away with "upping" the boost hence blown motors. either way just get a good tune nd youll b ok. :thumb:
User avatar

By newbie101
- Tue Mar 30, 2010 12:46 am #184465 Is a supercharger labor intensive? The main reason I was leaning towards a supercharger was b/c I read the DIY by teal with the same engine as mine and everything, and that turbo stuff seems really labor intensive. Plus I don't have immediate access to a drill for oil lines and that stuff and I need this car to go for a long time :D
 Reply
Return to Boost