Turbo vs. Supercharger (merged)

06RALLYREDSI · 06-26-2006, 04:49 PM

EVERYONES OPINION SHOULD GO INTO THIS THREAD.IN YOUR GUYS OPINION WICH IS BETTER..FOR YOUR 06 SI AND WHATS BETTER FOR YOUR ENGINE ...AND WHICH GIVES YOU THE BEST PERFORMANCE???

***CaliGuy*** · 06-26-2006, 05:15 PM

Heres my opinions based on my limited knowledge of forced induction.

Turbo:

Pros: Upgradable, tunable, non-parasitic
Cons: Lag, maintence, installation

S/C:

Pros: Installation, maintenence, less chance of blowing the engine (as boost is set, as far as I know)
Cons: parasitic, not tunable, non-upgradable

Performance wise Turbo definetly takes the cake!

I would think the turbo is better for the engine as it doesn't produce a load on the engine and wont hurt the engine unless you boost too high...

NoBottleJustThrottle · 06-26-2006, 05:24 PM

God...not this argument again. This is on every message board. Not even going to get into it.

tomasro · 06-26-2006, 06:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by CaliGuy

Heres my opinions based on my limited knowledge of forced induction.

Turbo:

Pros: Upgradable, tunable, non-parasitic
Cons: Lag, maintence, installation

S/C:

Pros: Installation, maintenence, less chance of blowing the engine (as boost is set, as far as I know)
Cons: parasitic, not tunable, non-upgradable

Performance wise Turbo definetly takes the cake!

I would think the turbo is better for the engine as it doesn't produce a load on the engine and wont hurt the engine unless you boost too high...

Well a turbo does produce a load on the engine, except it is not on the input, it's on the output (read: exhaust).

What do you mean that superchargers are parasitic?

NoBottleJustThrottle · 06-26-2006, 06:18 PM

superchargers are belt driven...they cause your motor to lose hp from "parasitic loss." Same type deal as the motor loses hp when you turn your AC on.
And a turbo does make load on the engine through the input from the output.

***CaliGuy*** · 06-26-2006, 06:39 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by NoBottleJustThrottle

superchargers are belt driven...they cause your motor to lose hp from "parasitic loss." Same type deal as the motor loses hp when you turn your AC on.
And a turbo does make load on the engine through the input from the output.

Thanks for the clarification re turbo...I wasn't aware of that..:)

skittleslegend · 06-26-2006, 06:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by CaliGuy

Heres my opinions based on my limited knowledge of forced induction.

Turbo:

Pros: Upgradable, tunable, non-parasitic
Cons: Lag, maintence, installation

S/C:

Pros: Installation, maintenence, less chance of blowing the engine (as boost is set, as far as I know)
Cons: parasitic, not tunable, non-upgradable

Performance wise Turbo definetly takes the cake!

I would think the turbo is better for the engine as it doesn't produce a load on the engine and wont hurt the engine unless you boost too high...

Also larger turbos don't do squat if you're in the wrong gear. Superchargers are generally, more linear.

Generally....

NoBottleJustThrottle · 06-26-2006, 07:02 PM

generally...

CivNick · 06-26-2006, 07:15 PM

well the SiR in 99-00 (b16a) goes slower with the S/C on the QM strip

that being said.. the SiR is a monster on the highway

id rather go with the turbo charger.. uses recycled exhaust .. make sure u do a in depth study on the basics of turbo charging b4 buying a kit or making a junk yard setup

NoBottleJustThrottle · 06-26-2006, 07:33 PM

goes slower than what? stock?

6ft5inAllMan · 06-26-2006, 07:53 PM

Me personally I would go SC because I dont want to increase my booste too much and a turbo and blow my engine. Also, I dont want too much more performace out of the car. It is good enought for me stock....

djoliverm · 06-26-2006, 08:08 PM

A supercharger is upgradeable in the sense that you can change the pulley size and thus increase the boost (this is how you change PSI on a supercharger, by getting a smaller pulley). Also for example the Comptech Superchager kit for the RSX Type-S and soon the '06 Civic Si comes with an ECU reflash from Hondata which tunes the ECU specifically for the added supercharger. Jackson Racing has this same sort of thing but only for it's "race" supercharger, and not the "street" one. So yes, Superchargers are "tuneable" but only from an ECU perspective in order to tune the ECU to take full advantage of the charger.

As for the debate, you have to ask yourself what you're looking for. Both are completely different and take you down different paths. If you just want a dyno monster and want to push insane amounts of HP then you're only bet is a turbo. Superchargers only go so far in terms of performance, but they are extremely linear (just imagine pushing the HP and Torque curves straight up by about 40-50+ HP). Turbos are another story and you'll obviously have the lag and thus only see the gains after it is spooled up. IMO I'm going for a supercharger since its zero lag, quite easy to maintain, and gives you lots of torque on hand from the get go. Plus by time you add a supercharger and I/H/E combo, you'll be pushing somewhere upwards of 250+ WHP on the Si. Remember that 300WHP is about the max you'd ever want to have for a front wheel drive car.

Neither is better than the other, each has advantages that the other doesn't have. Period.

SpeedDemon · 06-26-2006, 08:16 PM

I love Turbos cause of the sound...

Damn I wish I could use a DROOLING: smiley..

2evolved · 06-26-2006, 08:22 PM

I've had plenty of boost in my life... if I had a chance to pick now I would go for the supercharger they sound sweet too!

Also supercharger provides all throughout the rpms unlike turbo boosts at a certain rpm.

06RALLYREDSI · 06-26-2006, 10:18 PM

hmmmm

tennisfan16 · 06-26-2006, 10:25 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by NoBottleJustThrottle

God...not this argument again. This is on every message board. Not even going to get into it.

And yet you have responded to almost everyones opinion so go ahead and give yours.

CivNick · 06-26-2006, 11:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 2evolved

I've had plenty of boost in my life... if I had a chance to pick now I would go for the supercharger they sound sweet too!

Also supercharger provides all throughout the rpms unlike turbo boosts at a certain rpm.

Anyone who complains about turbo lag is either in the wrong gear, or the wrong car

tunning is a big factor when it comes to turbo boosting

hell u can get the car to boost right off the line

CivNick · 06-26-2006, 11:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by NoBottleJustThrottle

goes slower than what? stock?

yes

skittleslegend · 06-26-2006, 11:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by CivNick

Anyone who complains about turbo lag is either in the wrong gear, or the wrong car

tunning is a big factor when it comes to turbo boosting

hell u can get the car to boost right off the line

Tuning's not the only thing. Turbo sizing plays a big part as well. I think he said his FD had a larger turbo, which would account for the lag.

06RALLYREDSI · 06-27-2006, 12:59 PM

which one is better for the car such as long lasting

View Poll Results: Which do you prefer?
Turbo	105	43.93%
Supercharger	134	56.07%
Voters: 239. You may not vote on this poll

06-26-2006, 04:49 PM	#1 (permalink)
06RALLYREDSI Senior Member Join Date: May 2006 Location: CENTRAL,CALI Posts: 856 K20 rocket iTrader: 0 / 0%	Turbo vs. Supercharger (merged) EVERYONES OPINION SHOULD GO INTO THIS THREAD.IN YOUR GUYS OPINION WICH IS BETTER..FOR YOUR 06 SI AND WHATS BETTER FOR YOUR ENGINE ...AND WHICH GIVES YOU THE BEST PERFORMANCE??? Last edited by 06RALLYREDSI; 06-26-2006 at 05:01 PM.

06-26-2006, 05:15 PM	#2 (permalink)
*CaliGuy* VIP Member Join Date: May 2006 Location: SoCal Age: 30 Posts: 10,520 J. M. back by popular demand! iTrader: 4 / 100%	Heres my opinions based on my limited knowledge of forced induction. Turbo: Pros: Upgradable, tunable, non-parasitic Cons: Lag, maintence, installation S/C: Pros: Installation, maintenence, less chance of blowing the engine (as boost is set, as far as I know) Cons: parasitic, not tunable, non-upgradable Performance wise Turbo definetly takes the cake! I would think the turbo is better for the engine as it doesn't produce a load on the engine and wont hurt the engine unless you boost too high... __________________ Visit my city! Free vagin for every resident (in direct contrast to the other cities that only provide free Fleshlites!) http://eat-mykhram.myminicity.com/

06-26-2006, 08:08 PM	#12 (permalink)
djoliverm Member Join Date: Jun 2006 Location: Weston, FL Posts: 63 iTrader: 0 / 0%	A supercharger is upgradeable in the sense that you can change the pulley size and thus increase the boost (this is how you change PSI on a supercharger, by getting a smaller pulley). Also for example the Comptech Superchager kit for the RSX Type-S and soon the '06 Civic Si comes with an ECU reflash from Hondata which tunes the ECU specifically for the added supercharger. Jackson Racing has this same sort of thing but only for it's "race" supercharger, and not the "street" one. So yes, Superchargers are "tuneable" but only from an ECU perspective in order to tune the ECU to take full advantage of the charger. As for the debate, you have to ask yourself what you're looking for. Both are completely different and take you down different paths. If you just want a dyno monster and want to push insane amounts of HP then you're only bet is a turbo. Superchargers only go so far in terms of performance, but they are extremely linear (just imagine pushing the HP and Torque curves straight up by about 40-50+ HP). Turbos are another story and you'll obviously have the lag and thus only see the gains after it is spooled up. IMO I'm going for a supercharger since its zero lag, quite easy to maintain, and gives you lots of torque on hand from the get go. Plus by time you add a supercharger and I/H/E combo, you'll be pushing somewhere upwards of 250+ WHP on the Si. Remember that 300WHP is about the max you'd ever want to have for a front wheel drive car. Neither is better than the other, each has advantages that the other doesn't have. Period. Last edited by djoliverm; 06-26-2006 at 08:16 PM.

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

06-26-2006, 05:24 PM	#3 (permalink)
NoBottleJustThrottle Senior Member Join Date: May 2006 Location: Tustin, CA Age: 25 Posts: 336 iTrader: 0 / 0%	God...not this argument again. This is on every message board. Not even going to get into it.

06-26-2006, 06:18 PM	#5 (permalink)
NoBottleJustThrottle Senior Member Join Date: May 2006 Location: Tustin, CA Age: 25 Posts: 336 iTrader: 0 / 0%	superchargers are belt driven...they cause your motor to lose hp from "parasitic loss." Same type deal as the motor loses hp when you turn your AC on. And a turbo does make load on the engine through the input from the output.

06-26-2006, 07:02 PM	#8 (permalink)
NoBottleJustThrottle Senior Member Join Date: May 2006 Location: Tustin, CA Age: 25 Posts: 336 iTrader: 0 / 0%	generally...

06-26-2006, 07:15 PM	#9 (permalink)
CivNick Senior Member Join Date: May 2006 Location: Kitchener, ON Posts: 321 iTrader: 0 / 0%	well the SiR in 99-00 (b16a) goes slower with the S/C on the QM strip that being said.. the SiR is a monster on the highway id rather go with the turbo charger.. uses recycled exhaust .. make sure u do a in depth study on the basics of turbo charging b4 buying a kit or making a junk yard setup

06-26-2006, 07:33 PM	#10 (permalink)
NoBottleJustThrottle Senior Member Join Date: May 2006 Location: Tustin, CA Age: 25 Posts: 336 iTrader: 0 / 0%	goes slower than what? stock?

06-26-2006, 07:53 PM	#11 (permalink)
6ft5inAllMan Senior Member Join Date: Oct 2005 Age: 28 Posts: 249 iTrader: 0 / 0%	Me personally I would go SC because I dont want to increase my booste too much and a turbo and blow my engine. Also, I dont want too much more performace out of the car. It is good enought for me stock....

06-26-2006, 08:16 PM	#13 (permalink)
SpeedDemon Senior Member Join Date: Oct 2005 Location: Miami Baby! Posts: 3,958 They call me, El Diablo. iTrader: 6 / 100%	I love Turbos cause of the sound... Damn I wish I could use a DROOLING: smiley..

06-26-2006, 08:22 PM	#14 (permalink)
2evolved Senior Member Join Date: May 2006 Location: Boston Age: 23 Posts: 603 iTrader: 3 / 100%	I've had plenty of boost in my life... if I had a chance to pick now I would go for the supercharger they sound sweet too! Also supercharger provides all throughout the rpms unlike turbo boosts at a certain rpm.

06-26-2006, 10:18 PM	#15 (permalink)
06RALLYREDSI Senior Member Join Date: May 2006 Location: CENTRAL,CALI Posts: 856 K20 rocket iTrader: 0 / 0%	hmmmm

06-27-2006, 12:59 PM	#20 (permalink)
06RALLYREDSI Senior Member Join Date: May 2006 Location: CENTRAL,CALI Posts: 856 K20 rocket iTrader: 0 / 0%	which one is better for the car such as long lasting

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
supercharger + turbo in one ....	sickyute	Garage	41	05-26-2008 03:43 PM
Info on engines n/a and turbo	King Bob	Bolt-Ons And All-Motor	11	07-20-2007 01:11 AM
Who owned or ordered a turbo kit and supercharger	BATANG CITY JAIL	Forced Induction And Nitrous	49	04-17-2007 02:40 PM
1/4 Times for both supercharger and Turbo	Dizzle0420	Forced Induction And Nitrous	1	10-24-2006 11:42 PM
VW - Turbo and Supercharger Combo - Factory Built	webby	Garage	22	06-06-2006 06:20 PM