1999 SS...What's better..Turbo or supercharger?
Login | |
|
1999 SS...What's better..Turbo or supercharger? - 5/8/2007 7:47:04 PM
|
|
|
davidfarah
Posts: 14
Joined: 5/8/2007 Status: offline
|
Hey guys just taking opinions on which is faster and safer...turbo or supercharger?
|
|
|
|
|
|
RE: 1999 SS...What's better..Turbo or supercharger? - 5/11/2007 6:37:28 PM
|
|
|
ronster
Posts: 1
Joined: 5/9/2007 Status: offline
|
Turrbo HP is free HP. Supercharger HP loss on a centrifugal is roughly 12-15%. On a roots, screw or hybrid roots the loss could be as high as 25-30%. It uses HP to make HP. As far as wear and tear on the engine, the roots style blowers are instant on, and hit hard while the turbo and centrifugal S/C need to spool up and they make power gradually, so less of an impact on the engine. Ron
|
|
|
|
RE: 1999 SS...What's better..Turbo or supercharger? - 5/16/2007 4:24:23 PM
|
|
|
ninetysixyenko
Posts: 2087
Joined: 5/11/2007 Status: offline
|
turbo runs off exhaust and creates little HP on low end, but in high end can create double that of a super. super like sated, takes HP to make HP, but is made more for low end snap, and is( in my opinion) best on engines that already have nice top end speed(v8s..) but they wont make near as much as a turbo(super also decreases fuel eco, turbo dont). you can always increase pulley size on super too, to make more power
_____________________________
DC-Sport Header Back Exhaust, Injen SRI, AEM Under Drive Pulleys, B&M Short-Throw, Big Brake Kit, Torque Dampener. 5% Tint All Around, Halo''''s
|
|
|
|
|