turbo vs. supercharger
09-02-2010, 11:32 PM
#31
3rd Gear Member
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Delaware
Posts: 708
only need one turbo due to me having a V6,
You only need a single turbo period. As long as you size the turbo correctly for your application, there is no lag. The 67mm that was in my car when it was street driven (no longer street legal) would spin the tires in 3rd at 30 mph. Forget about all this hp stuff, turbos generate insane torque.
Show me the lag....granted the car is setup with racing in mind. Running 11 lbs boost at beginning and about 16 lbs in middle of vid and 22 lbs at the end
http://s149.photobucket.com/albums/s...nt=transb4.mp4
You only need a single turbo period. As long as you size the turbo correctly for your application, there is no lag. The 67mm that was in my car when it was street driven (no longer street legal) would spin the tires in 3rd at 30 mph. Forget about all this hp stuff, turbos generate insane torque.
Show me the lag....granted the car is setup with racing in mind. Running 11 lbs boost at beginning and about 16 lbs in middle of vid and 22 lbs at the end
http://s149.photobucket.com/albums/s...nt=transb4.mp4
09-03-2010, 06:06 AM
#33
4th Gear Member
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: LA
Posts: 1,201
Yeah...car was launching off a transbrake and 2 step (I did say it was setup for racing...lol). Just looked at the vid...audio is no longer synched with video???
Installed 4:10 gears when car had the Procharger which was hungry for rpms. Still had the 4:10s with the turbo, which was not ideal but manageable. Had to keep changing to larger diameter slick as trap increased, to offset the gearing. The spinning of tires in 3rd was with the 4r that car had with previous build. That was with the 67mm. There was definitely a noticeable lag for street driving with the 76. With new build (90% done), car has 2 speed powerglide and 3:50 gears. The glide is way lighter than the 4r70w and much simpler too. Focus on this build has been weight reduction. Car is at least 300 lbs lighter now.
Installed 4:10 gears when car had the Procharger which was hungry for rpms. Still had the 4:10s with the turbo, which was not ideal but manageable. Had to keep changing to larger diameter slick as trap increased, to offset the gearing. The spinning of tires in 3rd was with the 4r that car had with previous build. That was with the 67mm. There was definitely a noticeable lag for street driving with the 76. With new build (90% done), car has 2 speed powerglide and 3:50 gears. The glide is way lighter than the 4r70w and much simpler too. Focus on this build has been weight reduction. Car is at least 300 lbs lighter now.
09-03-2010, 06:32 AM
#34
I know two people, couple of years back, that used to have 4.0s and with a single turbo from Powerhouse, one got to 11.0 and the other 10.9 in the 1/4 with their V6s.
If you go turbo on our bigger displacement V8 engines, it is much better to go with multiple smaller turbos
Disagree based upon personal experience with my 06GT and not just the theoretical. Went from a Procharger P1SC to a 67mm single, then the present a 76mm which is not massive. Noticed some lag between the 67 and 76 for street driving. For 99+% of S197 owners something like the 67mm, that has no noticeable lag and is capable of around 650 rear wheel with the appropriate build, is more than enough. The 76 will get my car well into the 9s. Noone needs a massive turbo (except for someone eyeing 8s) and if you did, you would need way more cubes anyway.
Being one of the very few that have had both types of FI on the same vehicle....I have no preference. The single 67 turbo worked well with no lag, the 76 has no lag with the racing setup, and a supercharger with the right setup would meet my ET goals just as well.
If you go turbo on our bigger displacement V8 engines, it is much better to go with multiple smaller turbos
Disagree based upon personal experience with my 06GT and not just the theoretical. Went from a Procharger P1SC to a 67mm single, then the present a 76mm which is not massive. Noticed some lag between the 67 and 76 for street driving. For 99+% of S197 owners something like the 67mm, that has no noticeable lag and is capable of around 650 rear wheel with the appropriate build, is more than enough. The 76 will get my car well into the 9s. Noone needs a massive turbo (except for someone eyeing 8s) and if you did, you would need way more cubes anyway.
Being one of the very few that have had both types of FI on the same vehicle....I have no preference. The single 67 turbo worked well with no lag, the 76 has no lag with the racing setup, and a supercharger with the right setup would meet my ET goals just as well.
To eliminate lag, you chose a turbo meant for acceleration instead of all out max HP.
Moreover, the turbo you have is very well matched to the engine, i.e. engineer -tuned on the drawing board (or tuned to be exact at the instant the engineer was designing the turbo).
This is rather rare since turbo makers go for more of a compromise because of the HP war: They will boast big HP gains which unfortunately compromises acceleration gains due to lag.
But yours is a very nice match for your engine for acceleration application, which is what more of us do, not top speed racing.
You hit it directly on the head when you said "No one needs a massive turbo (except for someone eying 8s) and if you did, you would need way more cubes anyway."
09-03-2010, 09:59 AM
#35
5th Gear Member
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Redding, CA
Posts: 4,552
I know two people, couple of years back, that used to have 4.0s and with a single turbo from Powerhouse, one got to 11.0 and the other 10.9 in the 1/4 with their V6s.
If you go turbo on our bigger displacement V8 engines, it is much better to go with multiple smaller turbos
Disagree based upon personal experience with my 06GT and not just the theoretical. Went from a Procharger P1SC to a 67mm single, then the present a 76mm which is not massive. Noticed some lag between the 67 and 76 for street driving. For 99+% of S197 owners something like the 67mm, that has no noticeable lag and is capable of around 650 rear wheel with the appropriate build, is more than enough. The 76 will get my car well into the 9s. Noone needs a massive turbo (except for someone eyeing 8s) and if you did, you would need way more cubes anyway.
Being one of the very few that have had both types of FI on the same vehicle....I have no preference. The single 67 turbo worked well with no lag, the 76 has no lag with the racing setup, and a supercharger with the right setup would meet my ET goals just as well.
If you go turbo on our bigger displacement V8 engines, it is much better to go with multiple smaller turbos
Disagree based upon personal experience with my 06GT and not just the theoretical. Went from a Procharger P1SC to a 67mm single, then the present a 76mm which is not massive. Noticed some lag between the 67 and 76 for street driving. For 99+% of S197 owners something like the 67mm, that has no noticeable lag and is capable of around 650 rear wheel with the appropriate build, is more than enough. The 76 will get my car well into the 9s. Noone needs a massive turbo (except for someone eyeing 8s) and if you did, you would need way more cubes anyway.
Being one of the very few that have had both types of FI on the same vehicle....I have no preference. The single 67 turbo worked well with no lag, the 76 has no lag with the racing setup, and a supercharger with the right setup would meet my ET goals just as well.
Turbo
Absolute kick in the pants. Sounded awesome, little to no lag, insane top end and rare. This thing was a dream to drive on the street. It got wonderful mileage. The con had more to do with t hr track then anything else. With a stick car, it was hard to build boost at the line without a 2 step and even then, the first part of the run it would still be building boost. Had I installed a built automatic in the car I would have kept the turbo on the car.
Turbos are also a little more tricky when it comes to tuning.
Kenne Bell SC
Install was easy. Drivability is great, mileage sucks. I get 4-5 mpg less with the SC. If I put the 10 psi pulley on I would probably get a little more mpg, but who cares really?? Anyways, with the bigger throttle body and same psi, I make the same hp and have ran .4 faster and the same mph on pump gas instead of 100 octane. Tuning is easier and there are more people that know how to tune the SC cars compared to a turbo.
It looks like the OP has a V6 car. I would suggest to leave it alone, save his money and buy a new 2011 with a V6 or the V8.
09-03-2010, 10:04 AM
#36
4th Gear Member
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: LA
Posts: 1,201
I must say, if you have had success with a single turbo, then you chose your turbo VEY VERY well
We have had some success and some failures too. It's sort of like a mad science project....you go 3 steps forward, 1 back..sometimes 3/4 back. We are on our second built motor (1st went bye bye in spectacular fashion) with another 302 being prepped as backup
It's a collaborative effort. The builder manages the project and does much of the work, but he is in close contact and frequent discussions with the transmission/fuel people etc etc. To get this brick into the mid to low 9s, you are no longer modifying the car, rather rebuilding it....and it's all a bit experimental, with some uncertainty. For example, car now has a GM transmission (2 speed powerglide) for which special brackets and such had to fashioned, including a GM yolk for the custom driveshaft.
Even the dynotuning is different. For example, Exhaust Gas Temp sensors are used to monitor cylinders individually and datalogging at the strip with the tuners is obligatory.
Part of the challenge for the builder is going into uncharted waters with this S197 and there is a lot of R & D.
We have had some success and some failures too. It's sort of like a mad science project....you go 3 steps forward, 1 back..sometimes 3/4 back. We are on our second built motor (1st went bye bye in spectacular fashion) with another 302 being prepped as backup
It's a collaborative effort. The builder manages the project and does much of the work, but he is in close contact and frequent discussions with the transmission/fuel people etc etc. To get this brick into the mid to low 9s, you are no longer modifying the car, rather rebuilding it....and it's all a bit experimental, with some uncertainty. For example, car now has a GM transmission (2 speed powerglide) for which special brackets and such had to fashioned, including a GM yolk for the custom driveshaft.
Even the dynotuning is different. For example, Exhaust Gas Temp sensors are used to monitor cylinders individually and datalogging at the strip with the tuners is obligatory.
Part of the challenge for the builder is going into uncharted waters with this S197 and there is a lot of R & D.
09-03-2010, 11:28 AM
#37
4th Gear Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Washington
Posts: 1,768
I am also one of those people that have had a trubo and now a blower. There were pros and cons with each.
Turbo
Absolute kick in the pants. Sounded awesome, little to no lag, insane top end and rare. This thing was a dream to drive on the street. It got wonderful mileage. The con had more to do with t hr track then anything else. With a stick car, it was hard to build boost at the line without a 2 step and even then, the first part of the run it would still be building boost. Had I installed a built automatic in the car I would have kept the turbo on the car.
Turbos are also a little more tricky when it comes to tuning.
Kenne Bell SC
Install was easy. Drivability is great, mileage sucks. I get 4-5 mpg less with the SC. If I put the 10 psi pulley on I would probably get a little more mpg, but who cares really?? Anyways, with the bigger throttle body and same psi, I make the same hp and have ran .4 faster and the same mph on pump gas instead of 100 octane. Tuning is easier and there are more people that know how to tune the SC cars compared to a turbo.
[b/]It looks like the OP has a V6 car. I would suggest to leave it alone, save his money and buy a new 2011 with a V6 or the V8.[b/]
Turbo
Absolute kick in the pants. Sounded awesome, little to no lag, insane top end and rare. This thing was a dream to drive on the street. It got wonderful mileage. The con had more to do with t hr track then anything else. With a stick car, it was hard to build boost at the line without a 2 step and even then, the first part of the run it would still be building boost. Had I installed a built automatic in the car I would have kept the turbo on the car.
Turbos are also a little more tricky when it comes to tuning.
Kenne Bell SC
Install was easy. Drivability is great, mileage sucks. I get 4-5 mpg less with the SC. If I put the 10 psi pulley on I would probably get a little more mpg, but who cares really?? Anyways, with the bigger throttle body and same psi, I make the same hp and have ran .4 faster and the same mph on pump gas instead of 100 octane. Tuning is easier and there are more people that know how to tune the SC cars compared to a turbo.
[b/]It looks like the OP has a V6 car. I would suggest to leave it alone, save his money and buy a new 2011 with a V6 or the V8.[b/]
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
AMAlexLazarus
AmericanMuscle.com
0
10-01-2015 09:21 AM
03, 05, 2011, 50, cobra, downsides, ford, mustang, parts, performance, sc, supercharge, supercharger, turbo, turbocharged, turbocharging, v8s
