Go Back   MustangForums.com > Ford Mustang Tech > 2005 - 2014 Mustangs
Sign in using an external account
Register Forgot Password?
Search


2005 - 2014 Mustangs Discussions on the latest S197 model Mustangs from Ford.
Sponsored by Latemodel Restoration


Welcome to Mustang Forums!
Welcome to Mustang Forums.

You are currently viewing our forum as a guest, which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our community, at no cost, you will have access to post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is free, fast and simple, so please join our community today!


Reply
 
 
 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 02-29-2012, 02:08 PM   #31
JIM5.0
5th Gear Member
 
JIM5.0's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Vehicle: 2011 GT 5.0 Coyote
Location: Texas
Posts: 4,368
None, Facebook is the Devil! None, Twitter is for Twits! None, I hate it when my boss snoops the net about me
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dylanjunk View Post
it just occured to me that most mustangs that push over 1000hp use turbos. i cant think of any s/c stangs that are making that much, so why do turbos produce so much hp?
Speaking mechanically, the reason why turbos can yield more power over a supercharger is because the way they are coupled.

Supercharger are mechanically coupled (several before me already mentioned this). This means that you have to spend engine power to turn the supercharger unit. Also said before me, Ford engineers have estimated that the new 5.8L Trinity in the '13 GT500 wastes ~100 BHP to turn the supercharger on top of it, but the net gains of the supercharging outweigh the power loss.

Turbos are not mechanically coupled by hardware; they are coupled to the engine only by fluid forces of the exhaust acting on the turbine wheels.
This is the efficiency other above me are talking about, you do not waste crank power to turn it. Just the pumping power to push the exhaust gases against the turbine is required, which can be considerably less than the power required to turn a supercharger.

To be quite honest, the very high HP turbo setups use very massive lag-heavy turbos. They make a buttload of power and even torque at very high RPM, but are about useless at low RPMs, where it counts on the drag strip and on the street.
Such a set-up is really useful where racing is very much mostly where you are at high speeds where you never have to slow down to any kind of DD speeds.
This ad is not displayed to registered or logged-in members.
Register your free account today and become a member on Mustang Forums!
__________________

Squirrel of Death!
Do not **** off the SoD!!!!
JIM5.0 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-29-2012, 03:08 PM   #32
essayons
2nd Gear Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Vehicle: 2001 330i and 2011 GT/CS
Location: Virginia
Posts: 229
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by JIM5.0 View Post
It is possible to counteract turbo lag without the use of such external devices added to the turbos.
Though more expensive and more complicated, compound turbos of different sizes in series or parallel do the trick.
For example, the F250+ 7.4L power strokes use a parallel turbo setup. One small turbo for off the line low power RPM, a larger turbo for higher RPM operations.

The same can be done with gasoline engines.
Like you said, though... more complicated, more expensive. BMWs problem (and anyone's problem, really) with the dual (or any multiple) turbo set up on the 335 was initially way too much heat from the compressors. The excessive heat was causing the turbos to burn out. And then there were fuel pump issues, as well, which were blamed on E10 usage.

The electric motor "primer" for the large turbo was the answer to the heat problems with multiple turbochargers.
essayons is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-29-2012, 04:53 PM   #33
Lil_Chef
3rd Gear Member
 
Lil_Chef's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Vehicle: 2010 Ford Mustang
Location: FL
Posts: 605
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by JIM5.0 View Post
It is possible to counteract turbo lag without the use of such external devices added to the turbos.
Though more expensive and more complicated, compound turbos of different sizes in series or parallel do the trick.
For example, the F250+ 7.4L power strokes use a parallel turbo setup. One small turbo for off the line low power RPM, a larger turbo for higher RPM operations.

The same can be done with gasoline engines.
Porsche is rumored to be using three different sized twin scroll turbos for the 991 Turbo!
Lil_Chef is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-29-2012, 06:54 PM   #34
moosestang
6th Gear Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Vehicle: 2006 mustang gt
Location: Gainesville, FL
Posts: 11,270
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ditty View Post
Turbos make more crank and wheel horse power b/c they produce more torque. You drive torque, you buy HP! lol.

Torque is the ability to do work. HP is how FAST you get that work done.

On the neverending debate of which is better, Turbos are more efficient and less troublesome that SC typically. That isn't to say that either can be trouble-less/troublesome. There is a reason that most factory-boosted vehicles are turboed. Effiency, gas mileage, and less prone to cause problems at lower power levels.

It all comes down to what you want for YOUR car. Instant, almost linear power (SC), or n/a cruising and mpgs with big power when YOU want it (turbo).
I'm a diesel fanatic, and I LOVE turbos! (It's also a LOT easier and cheaper to rebuild a turbo and/or upgrade the internals that it is to do the same to a SC.)
What is N/A cruising? The power to turn the supercharger pulley, while cruising, is negligible. I would wager that you would see no significant difference in mpg between a supercharger and turbo on this car. I still get 18mpg driving like a douche and I have 4.10 gears.

Turbos are cheap power, that's why the factory uses them.
__________________
Boost or Buell, decisions, decisions.

whipple HO SC,FRPP k springs, Pypes mid mufflers, hurst, frpp TB, 4.10's, spohn lca's, adj. UCA, relo brackets, 1 piece DS, spec stg 3+ clutch. 12.52@117.6mph so far with a 2.01 60 ft time

Pumpkin jacking addict
moosestang is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-29-2012, 07:03 PM   #35
moosestang
6th Gear Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Vehicle: 2006 mustang gt
Location: Gainesville, FL
Posts: 11,270
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by danzcool View Post
Quite a few been done.
totally sick, and keeps me drooling.
http://youtu.be/HoHmaEqD7T8
He must have **** his paints on that last run!
__________________
Boost or Buell, decisions, decisions.

whipple HO SC,FRPP k springs, Pypes mid mufflers, hurst, frpp TB, 4.10's, spohn lca's, adj. UCA, relo brackets, 1 piece DS, spec stg 3+ clutch. 12.52@117.6mph so far with a 2.01 60 ft time

Pumpkin jacking addict
moosestang is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-01-2012, 09:43 PM   #36
LordRipberger
3rd Gear Member
 
LordRipberger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Vehicle: 2006 V6 Mustang
Location: Purdue University Alum in MD
Posts: 523
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by JIM5.0 View Post
Speaking mechanically, the reason why turbos can yield more power over a supercharger is because the way they are coupled.

Supercharger are mechanically coupled (several before me already mentioned this). This means that you have to spend engine power to turn the supercharger unit. Also said before me, Ford engineers have estimated that the new 5.8L Trinity in the '13 GT500 wastes ~100 BHP to turn the supercharger on top of it, but the net gains of the supercharging outweigh the power loss.

Turbos are not mechanically coupled by hardware; they are coupled to the engine only by fluid forces of the exhaust acting on the turbine wheels.
This is the efficiency other above me are talking about, you do not waste crank power to turn it. Just the pumping power to push the exhaust gases against the turbine is required, which can be considerably less than the power required to turn a supercharger.

To be quite honest, the very high HP turbo setups use very massive lag-heavy turbos. They make a buttload of power and even torque at very high RPM, but are about useless at low RPMs, where it counts on the drag strip and on the street.
Such a set-up is really useful where racing is very much mostly where you are at high speeds where you never have to slow down to any kind of DD speeds.
Would a turbo charger designed for higher RPMs (meaning not enough exhaust pressure coming out the back at 2000RPMs to gain the boost of the TC) cause back-pressure therefore reducing HP when the engine is not reved up.

I only know how TC are installed in theory. I have never actually done it, but if it is uses the pressure from the exhaust, wouldn't that mean that the exhaust ports (or wherever the turbo attaches too) would have to be partially blocked in order for it to force a turbine to spin?

Last edited by LordRipberger; 03-02-2012 at 10:56 AM.
LordRipberger is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-02-2012, 01:50 AM   #37
siggyfreud
5th Gear Member
 
siggyfreud's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Vehicle: 2013 Boss 302
Location: Oregon
Posts: 2,647
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by moosestang View Post
What is N/A cruising? The power to turn the supercharger pulley, while cruising, is negligible. I would wager that you would see no significant difference in mpg between a supercharger and turbo on this car. I still get 18mpg driving like a douche and I have 4.10 gears.

Turbos are cheap power, that's why the factory uses them.
On more recent engines with boost bypass valves yeah. Some traditional designs don't have this, so you're stuck compressing regardless. But yes, on chargers such as the twin screw I have, you're probably only losing 1-2hp while not in boost.
__________________
max sig size 500px wide X 250px high. Thank you, Admin.
What to do with a blown motor - Check it out.
siggyfreud is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-02-2012, 11:56 AM   #38
Jas5
3rd Gear Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Vehicle: 2007, s/c GT
Location: OK
Posts: 667
Default

I have a centrifugal supercharger so it's basically a turbocharger that takes the place of a supercharger. I know centri's run a lot cooler than standard roots or twins scroll S/C, because they don't sit right on top of the motor. Also, they can produce more power, because IIRC they spin faster. BUT the downside is, I don't get boost at ~2k rpm, right at 3k is when I feel the boost. So I guess it basically feels like a couple turbos. Swap the pulley and it has the capacity to make 1000 hp. Of course, I would need a lot more than a stock 4.6L like I have now (running around 5lbs, ~350whp)

They are very quiet compared to roots or twin scroll. I can really only hear it when idling or up to 2k rpm, then beyond that it sounds all motor with a CAI. Sleeper is awesome. But the whine of a cobra is sick too. Depends what you want.

edit: here's a pic of the snail The cold air comes into the front, the rear is where the belt is located, driven by the crank. And there is a FMIC (front mount intercooler) = more powaaaaa
Click the image to open in full size.
__________________

Paxton NOVI 2200SL @ 5psi on stock motor, 3" magnapack catback, Hurst short throw shifter, Kaenen cowl hood, 18" Saleen replica wheels, 255/285 Yokohama Advan S, 8 in. shorty antenna, blacked out rear lights/decklid, BOSS style fog-deletes

Last edited by Jas5; 03-02-2012 at 12:00 PM.
Jas5 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-02-2012, 12:35 PM   #39
Mishri
Mish-ogynist
 
Mishri's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Vehicle: 2012 5.0 premuim
Location: Great Falls, MT
Posts: 3,701
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ditty View Post
Turbos make more crank and wheel horse power b/c they produce more torque. You drive torque, you buy HP! lol.

Torque is the ability to do work. HP is how FAST you get that work done.

On the neverending debate of which is better, Turbos are more efficient and less troublesome that SC typically. That isn't to say that either can be trouble-less/troublesome. There is a reason that most factory-boosted vehicles are turboed. Effiency, gas mileage, and less prone to cause problems at lower power levels.

It all comes down to what you want for YOUR car. Instant, almost linear power (SC), or n/a cruising and mpgs with big power when YOU want it (turbo).
I'm a diesel fanatic, and I LOVE turbos! (It's also a LOT easier and cheaper to rebuild a turbo and/or upgrade the internals that it is to do the same to a SC.)
On the stock 3-valve engine turbo's tend to blow up engines at lower power levels than superchargers.. I'm not sure if it's how people are setting hem up or what the deal is but i've seen more issues reported from people with turbos than superchargers. It's rare that I hear someone with a stock engine and a turbo w/o any issues.

on the 5.0 so far all of the fastest 1/4 mile times on the stock engine are put up by the TVS supercharger. (in the 9's) Someone was trying to run twin turbos on a stock engine 5.0, blew it up before even getting close to 9s, it was running mid-high 10s.


so.. I can't really say why they are seeing these issues, too much heat? i don't know but unless you are building up your engine as far as i've seen turbos aren't a wise choice. Although on a forged engine they do great. Of the fastest 5 3-valve mustangs only 2 are turbo'd, running 8.4-8.9@147-164mph, and the fastest one was a single turbo, 8.4@164, 2nd was supercharged, using a procharger, 8.8@147.


btw, some of the new turbos can put out great power with very little lag. Ford could turbo or even twin turbo the GT500 if they wanted to, the Taurus SHO is turbocharged. There have been rumors of a factory twin turbo GT500. I'm betting cost and the number of people turning up the boost and blowing the engine might be a factor for why they haven't.
__________________

Automatic, Steeda CAI, 4.10 gears, Boss Intake, BBR O/R X, Steeda Tune, M&H Drag Radials.
12.6@112mph (DA corrected 11.7@119mph)
Quote:
Originally Posted by ImpOnFire View Post
mishri created the universe

Last edited by Mishri; 03-02-2012 at 02:30 PM.
Mishri is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-02-2012, 01:05 PM   #40
onederful100
6th Gear Member
 
onederful100's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Vehicle: 2007 GT 2000 GT
Location: Honolulu, HI
Posts: 6,120
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by moosestang View Post
What is N/A cruising? The power to turn the supercharger pulley, while cruising, is negligible. I would wager that you would see no significant difference in mpg between a supercharger and turbo on this car. I still get 18mpg driving like a douche and I have 4.10 gears.

Turbos are cheap power, that's why the factory uses them.

great points, Moose.

i get about the same mpg's as my dads NA GT. average about 14 mpgs for both with a lot of city driving.
its a pretty accurate comparison since our driving areas are about the same.

turbo kits can be pretty cheap too.
__________________


Whipple Crew Member
2-Stang Crew Member
my car
onederful100 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-02-2012, 01:05 PM
MustangForums
Ford Mustang




Paid Advertisement

 
 
 
Reply

Tags
2012, 46, autocraft, charge, dual, horsepower, hp, make, mustang, power, push, supercharger, turbo, turbochargers, turbos

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off

Forum Jump

Advertising

Featured Sponsors
Vendor Directory
New Sponsors
All times are GMT -5. The time now is 09:46 PM.

© Internet Brands, Inc.


This forum is owned and operated by Internet Brands, Inc., a Delaware corporation. It is not authorized or endorsed by the Ford Motor Company and is not affiliated with the Ford Motor Company or its related companies in any way. Ford® is a registered trademark of the Ford Motor Company
Emails Backup