why not supercharged?
Thread Starter
Senior Member
Joined: Apr 2005
Posts: 327
Likes: 0
From: 707
why not supercharged?
my question is that how come more people choose turbo over the supercharger? is there a fat hp gap between the two ? what i know is that superchargers have less boost lag which means faster 0-60 . i also tried to research fb 12a supercharged but nothing really came up .they sell the product at atkins and at camden but no one has really dont the conversion . 
there have been some good threads on this. From memory:
cheaper to go turbo when using S4/S5 used turbos et all.
no parasitic loss w/turbo
less tension on the main pully with turbo. supercharger belt can be overtightened and front bearings in motor wear more.
although turbos have turbolag and superchargers do not, a well built synergestic rotary will have minimal turbo lag. My 1990 Turbo ][ with cat back was a real screamer.
cheaper to go turbo when using S4/S5 used turbos et all.
no parasitic loss w/turbo
less tension on the main pully with turbo. supercharger belt can be overtightened and front bearings in motor wear more.
although turbos have turbolag and superchargers do not, a well built synergestic rotary will have minimal turbo lag. My 1990 Turbo ][ with cat back was a real screamer.
Burning Oil-Grinding 3rd
Joined: Apr 2002
Posts: 4,094
Likes: 1
From: Union Mills NC
There are a couple SC here on the forum, and the 2nd gen guys have a cheep setup they build.
codeblue and 64mgb have the Atkins setup.
We had a real good tread about them last week or the one before.
codeblue and 64mgb have the Atkins setup.
We had a real good tread about them last week or the one before.
84Stock has a setup in the Canadian forum.
84Stock spent a rediculous amount and achived less than 200HP. But the Supercharger has incredable low and mid-range. And the sound is amazing. Ever wanted an F1 car as a daily driver? Thats what an Atkins/Camden Supercharger sounds like.
Dollar to HP Ratio, Turbo is the way to go.
84Stock spent a rediculous amount and achived less than 200HP. But the Supercharger has incredable low and mid-range. And the sound is amazing. Ever wanted an F1 car as a daily driver? Thats what an Atkins/Camden Supercharger sounds like.
Dollar to HP Ratio, Turbo is the way to go.
The reason I went with the Camden unit is because I thought it looked easier to do and would not suffer from turbo lag. I have not installed the motor yet, so I can't give driving impressions, but I can say that it is VERY easy to install. From what I've seen it looks like there is a fair amount of plumbing and fabricating to do with a turbocharger...no such concerns with a supercharger...well, not for me anyway, since I am only going for about 6 pounds of boost and should not have to worry about detonation. If you want more boost I suspect you will need to use low compression rotors and do some sort of intercooling to cool the charge.
84stock also has a Camden and can give more input than I can.
Rich
84stock also has a Camden and can give more input than I can.
Rich
Trending Topics
Senior Member
Joined: Jul 2003
Posts: 416
Likes: 0
From: Wayne, NJ 07470
If you are going under 5 PSI up to maybe 10 PSI. The differences are going to be minimal. It will depend on how good you are at getting bargain prices and how well you can design a system.
As you pass 10 PSI a turbo is more efficient and a SC has less lag. You take your pick.
Since turbo's are more common, you'll get way more advice on why you should get a turbo. It's easy to do a turbo wrong and everybody will tell you how you went wrong. It's also easy to do a SC wrong but everybody will tell you it's because SC's suck. (they're wrong)
ed
As you pass 10 PSI a turbo is more efficient and a SC has less lag. You take your pick.
Since turbo's are more common, you'll get way more advice on why you should get a turbo. It's easy to do a turbo wrong and everybody will tell you how you went wrong. It's also easy to do a SC wrong but everybody will tell you it's because SC's suck. (they're wrong)
ed
REW'd FB
Joined: Dec 2004
Posts: 2,685
Likes: 1
From: WA
I took a ride in codeblue2's SC 79. Man that thing had an immense amount of low end torque. It would be a blast to drive around the streets. People tend to produce a fair amount more hp with a turbo as well. I think that it is because Atkins recomends that you only run 11lbs boost with the SC versus a turbo where people run an excess of 30lbs.
When I was debating here is the things that I thought of.
Turbo:
1.Turbo was a lot cheaper...in the thousands if done correctly and to my liking.
2. turbo can create a lot more hp
3. more freely given advice...there are a lot more people with turbo's
4. parts more available and from more vendors
SC:
1. unique
2. creates a ton of low end power...great for a street driven car.
3. sound....mmmmm gotta love the SC whine.
I am going with a turbo...but trust me I was on the fence for quite a while. Especially after codeblue took me for a ride! Thanks guys. Are you trying to choose?
I would love to hear that the Eaton guys have to say!
When I was debating here is the things that I thought of.
Turbo:
1.Turbo was a lot cheaper...in the thousands if done correctly and to my liking.
2. turbo can create a lot more hp
3. more freely given advice...there are a lot more people with turbo's
4. parts more available and from more vendors
SC:
1. unique
2. creates a ton of low end power...great for a street driven car.
3. sound....mmmmm gotta love the SC whine.
I am going with a turbo...but trust me I was on the fence for quite a while. Especially after codeblue took me for a ride! Thanks guys. Are you trying to choose?
I would love to hear that the Eaton guys have to say!
Originally Posted by edmcguirk
If you are going under 5 PSI up to maybe 10 PSI. The differences are going to be minimal.
Even at 9 PSI, my car does 336 RWHP. That's just the wastegate spring,
I can't run any less boost or less power.
At 14 PSI, my car does 409 RWHP. (low boost)
At 18 PSI, my car does 457 RWHP (still on 93 octane),
just stright boost with no water/alcohol injection (yet).
I start making boost at 2000 RPM, and see FULL-ON Bost
by 4200 RPM. I don't have any lag.
I have yet to see even ONE supercharged Rotary setup
even make 250 RWHP.
-------------------
That's why superchargers are not good on a rotary.
The only one I would even consider, is a centrifugal type
supercharger. Which is basically a belt-driver turbo.
Good Luck.
Hunting Skylines
Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 3,431
Likes: 4
From: Brisbane, Queensland, Australia.
Originally Posted by a13btrx7@hotmail.com
if u plan to use low compression rotors where can u possilbly buy them? or do u get it from a 2nd gen turbo 2 , if u do will that rotor fit inside the 12a since it comes from a 13b
Senior Member
Joined: Jul 2003
Posts: 416
Likes: 0
From: Wayne, NJ 07470
Originally Posted by Directfreak
I don't think so.
Even at 9 PSI, my car does 336 RWHP. That's just the wastegate spring,
I can't run any less boost or less power.
At 14 PSI, my car does 409 RWHP. (low boost)
At 18 PSI, my car does 457 RWHP (still on 93 octane),
just stright boost with no water/alcohol injection (yet).
I start making boost at 2000 RPM, and see FULL-ON Bost
by 4200 RPM. I don't have any lag.
I have yet to see even ONE supercharged Rotary setup
even make 250 RWHP.
-------------------
That's why superchargers are not good on a rotary.
The only one I would even consider, is a centrifugal type
supercharger. Which is basically a belt-driver turbo.
Good Luck.
Even at 9 PSI, my car does 336 RWHP. That's just the wastegate spring,
I can't run any less boost or less power.
At 14 PSI, my car does 409 RWHP. (low boost)
At 18 PSI, my car does 457 RWHP (still on 93 octane),
just stright boost with no water/alcohol injection (yet).
I start making boost at 2000 RPM, and see FULL-ON Bost
by 4200 RPM. I don't have any lag.
I have yet to see even ONE supercharged Rotary setup
even make 250 RWHP.
-------------------
That's why superchargers are not good on a rotary.
The only one I would even consider, is a centrifugal type
supercharger. Which is basically a belt-driver turbo.
Good Luck.
As you pass 10psi the SC inefficiency starts to show up enough to notice and some lag starts in even the best turbo. It might not be much turbo lag but the SC has no lag at all and it has full boost at all RPM - not just most RPM.
I don't know what other mods your car has but I have not heard of stock engines with your HP at your boost. I have yet to see a complete rotary SC system that includes an intercooler and proper fuel mapping let alone with whatever engine mods you have. That doesn't mean it can't be done.
Centrifugal SC combine the worst aspects of a turbo with the worst aspects of a Roots SC. They post impressive bragging numbers at redline though. Not good for much else IMO.
ed
Originally Posted by edmcguirk
I don't know what other mods your car has but I have not heard of stock engines with your HP at your boost. I have yet to see a complete rotary SC system that includes an intercooler and proper fuel mapping let alone with whatever engine mods you have. That doesn't mean it can't be done.
Originally Posted by edmcguirk
Centrifugal SC combine the worst aspects of a turbo with the worst aspects of a Roots SC.
Senior Member
Joined: Jul 2003
Posts: 416
Likes: 0
From: Wayne, NJ 07470
Originally Posted by Directfreak
Ed, if you are referring to my car, it's turbocharged, not supercharged.
I am curious as to how you would come to this conclusion. Could you please elaborate?
I am curious as to how you would come to this conclusion. Could you please elaborate?
The centrifugal SC has all the parasitic loss on the crankshaft as a roots SC but it's boost delivery is even more nonlinear than a turbo. All the boost slams on in the top 1000 RPM with almost nothing below.
OK it's a little more efficient than roots and it doesn't have the exhaust back pressure or the heat of a turbo but in my mind that doesn't make up for the nearly undrivable boost curve.
ed
Originally Posted by edmcguirk
Centrifugal SC combine the worst aspects of a turbo with the worst aspects of a Roots SC. They post impressive bragging numbers at redline though. Not good for much else IMO.
ed
ed
The only significant disadvantage of the centrifugal supercharger is that it must be spinning at a relatively high speed before it begins to make a significant amount of boost. For this reason, it is not helpful in creating boost (and power) at low engine rpms. Normally the supercharger only begins to create boost at around 3000 rpm, and the boost curve gradually and increasingly rises with engine RPM.
I found a better one...
The biggest drawback of the centrifugal supercharger is it's inability to make high levels of boost at low engine rpms. Typically, a centrifugal supercharger will make it's maximum (quoted) boost at the engine's redline rpm and nearly nothing at 1500-2000 engine rpm. Boost builds exponentially with engine rpm, meaning that boost comes on very quickly in the upper half of the powerband. While this normally isn't a problem for lighter cars with manual trannsmissions, it poses a significant problem to heavier vehicles, towing vehicles, or vehicles with automatic transmissions.
Last edited by 2wankel; Aug 30, 2005 at 02:11 PM.
Another clippy from same source...
Turbo vs. Supercharger
4/3/2002 11:31:00 PM
Turbo vs. Supercharger
4/3/2002 11:31:00 PM
It's one of the most common questions we are asked - the answer to which is almost impossible to find
"What is better - a supercharger or a turbo?"
"What is better - a supercharger or a turbo?"
We only wish the answer were that simple, but unfortunately it is not. The simple answer is:
"It depends."
But don't worry, we'll go into more depth than that here. Both superchargers and turbos have distinct advantages and disadvantages. Selecting the right kind of forced induction for your vehicle will depend upon your particular vehicle, your driving habits, your power preferences, and your needs.
"It depends."
But don't worry, we'll go into more depth than that here. Both superchargers and turbos have distinct advantages and disadvantages. Selecting the right kind of forced induction for your vehicle will depend upon your particular vehicle, your driving habits, your power preferences, and your needs.
Clearing Up Confusion
According to Merriam-Webster's dictionary, a supercharger is defined as:
"a device (as a blower or compressor) for pressurizing the cabin of an airplane or for increasing the volume air charge of an internal combustion engine over that which would normally be drawn in through the pumping action of the pistons".
A turbocharger is defined as:
"a centrifugal blower driven by exhaust gas turbines and used to supercharge an engine".
"a device (as a blower or compressor) for pressurizing the cabin of an airplane or for increasing the volume air charge of an internal combustion engine over that which would normally be drawn in through the pumping action of the pistons".
A turbocharger is defined as:
"a centrifugal blower driven by exhaust gas turbines and used to supercharge an engine".
According to Webster's, a turbocharger is included in the definition for superchargers - it is in fact a very specific type of supercharger - one that is driven by exhaust gasses. Other superchargers that do not fall into this category - the kind that we are all used to hearing about - are normally driven directly from the engine's crankshaft via a crank pulley. So in reality, it is not fair to compare all superchargers to turbochargers, because all turbochargers are also superchargers. For the purpose of this discussion, however, a supercharger will be considered all superchargers that are are not driven directly by the engine, while turbochargers will be considered all superchargers that are driven by engine exhaust gasses.
Similarities
Both superchargers and turbochargers are forced induction systems and thus have the same objective - to compress air and force more air molecules into the engine's combustion chambers than would normally be allowed at atmospheric pressure here on Earth (14.7 psi at sea level). The benefit of forcing more air molecules into the combustion chambers is that it allows your engine to burn more fuel per power stroke. With an internal combustion engine, burning more fuel means that you convert more fuel into energy and power. For this reason, supercharged and turbocharged engines normally produce 40% to 100%+ more power (depending on the amount of boost - check out our horespower calculator) than normally aspirated engines.
How They Work
A supercharger is mounted to the engine and is driven by a pulley that is inline with the crank (or accessory) belt. Air is drawn into the supercharger and compressed by either an impeller (centrifugal-style supercharger), twin rotating screws (screw-type supercharger), or counter-rotating rotors (roots-type supercharger). The air is then discharged into the engine's intake. Faster crank speed (more engine rpm) spins the supercharger faster and allows the supercharger to produce more boost (normally 6 to 9 psi for a street vehicle). Typical peak operating speeds for a supercharger are around 15,000 rpm (screw-type and roots style superchargers) and 40,000 rpm (centrifugal-style superchargers).
A turbocharger operates in much the same way as a centrifugal (internal impeller) supercharger, except it is not driven by pulleys and belts attached to the engine's crank. A turbo is instead driven by exhaust gasses that have been expelled by the engine and are travelling through the exhaust manifold. The exhaust gas flows through one half of the turbocharger's turbine, which drives the impeller that compresses the air. Typical operating speeds of a turbocharger are between 75,000 and 150,000 rpm.
Head to Head Comparison
Now it's time to evaluate the turbocharger versus the supercharger according to several important factors.
Cost
The cost of supercharger and a turbocharger systems for the same engine are approximately the same, so cost is generally not a factor.
The cost of supercharger and a turbocharger systems for the same engine are approximately the same, so cost is generally not a factor.
Lag
This is perhaps the biggest advantage that the supercharger enjoys over the tubo. Because a turbocharger is driven by exhaust gasses, the turbocharger's turbine must first spool up before it even begins to turn the compressor's impeller. This results in lag time which is the time needed for the turbine to reach its full throttle from an intermediate rotational speed state. During this lag time, the turbocharger is creating little to no boost, which means little to no power gains during this time. Smaller turbos spool up quicker, which eliminates some of this lag. Turbochargers thus utilize a wastegate, which allows the use of a smaller turbocharger to reduce lag while preventing it from spinning too quickly at high engine speeds. The wastegate is a valve that allows the exhaust to bypass the turbine blades. The wastegate senses boost pressure, and if it gets too high, it could be an indicator that the turbine is spinning too quickly, so the wastegate bypasses some of the exhaust around the turbine blades, allowing the blades to slow down..
A Supercharger, on the other hand, is connected directly to the crank, so there is no "lag". Superchargers are able to produce boost at a very low rpm, especially screw-type and roots type blowers.
This is perhaps the biggest advantage that the supercharger enjoys over the tubo. Because a turbocharger is driven by exhaust gasses, the turbocharger's turbine must first spool up before it even begins to turn the compressor's impeller. This results in lag time which is the time needed for the turbine to reach its full throttle from an intermediate rotational speed state. During this lag time, the turbocharger is creating little to no boost, which means little to no power gains during this time. Smaller turbos spool up quicker, which eliminates some of this lag. Turbochargers thus utilize a wastegate, which allows the use of a smaller turbocharger to reduce lag while preventing it from spinning too quickly at high engine speeds. The wastegate is a valve that allows the exhaust to bypass the turbine blades. The wastegate senses boost pressure, and if it gets too high, it could be an indicator that the turbine is spinning too quickly, so the wastegate bypasses some of the exhaust around the turbine blades, allowing the blades to slow down..
A Supercharger, on the other hand, is connected directly to the crank, so there is no "lag". Superchargers are able to produce boost at a very low rpm, especially screw-type and roots type blowers.
Efficiency
This is the turbo's biggest advantage. The turbocharger is generally more economical to operate as it as it is driven primarily by potential energy in the exhaust gasses that would otherwise be lost out the exhaust, whereas a supercharger draws power from the crank, which can be used to turn the wheels. The turbocharger's impeller is also powered only under boost conditions, so there is less parasitic drag while the impeller is not spinning. The turbocharger, however, is not free of inefficiency as it does create additional exhaust backpressure and exhaust flow interruption.
This is the turbo's biggest advantage. The turbocharger is generally more economical to operate as it as it is driven primarily by potential energy in the exhaust gasses that would otherwise be lost out the exhaust, whereas a supercharger draws power from the crank, which can be used to turn the wheels. The turbocharger's impeller is also powered only under boost conditions, so there is less parasitic drag while the impeller is not spinning. The turbocharger, however, is not free of inefficiency as it does create additional exhaust backpressure and exhaust flow interruption.
Heat
Because the turbocharger is mounted to the exhaust manifold (which is very hot), turbocharger boost is subject to additional heating via the turbo's hot casing. Because hot air expands (the opposite goal of a turbo or supercharger), an intercooler becomes necessary on almost all turbocharged applications to cool the air charge before it is released into the engine. This increases the complexity of the installation. A centrifugal supercharger on the other hand creates a cooler air discharge, so an intercooler is often not necessary at boost levels below 10psi. That said, some superchargers (especially roots-type superchargers) create hotter discharge temperatures, which also make an intecooler necessary even on fairly low-boost applications.
Because the turbocharger is mounted to the exhaust manifold (which is very hot), turbocharger boost is subject to additional heating via the turbo's hot casing. Because hot air expands (the opposite goal of a turbo or supercharger), an intercooler becomes necessary on almost all turbocharged applications to cool the air charge before it is released into the engine. This increases the complexity of the installation. A centrifugal supercharger on the other hand creates a cooler air discharge, so an intercooler is often not necessary at boost levels below 10psi. That said, some superchargers (especially roots-type superchargers) create hotter discharge temperatures, which also make an intecooler necessary even on fairly low-boost applications.
Surge
Because a turbocharger first spools up before the boost is delivered to the engine, there is a surge of power that is delivered immediately when the wastegate opens (around 3000 rpm). This surge can be damaging to the engine and drivetrain, and can make the vehicle difficult to drive or lose traction.
Because a turbocharger first spools up before the boost is delivered to the engine, there is a surge of power that is delivered immediately when the wastegate opens (around 3000 rpm). This surge can be damaging to the engine and drivetrain, and can make the vehicle difficult to drive or lose traction.
Back Pressure
Because the supercharger eliminates the need to deal with the exhaust gas interruption created by inserting a turbocharger turbine into the exhaust flow, the supercharger creates no additional exhaust backpressure. The amount of power that is lost by a turbo's turbine reduces it's overall efficiency.
Because the supercharger eliminates the need to deal with the exhaust gas interruption created by inserting a turbocharger turbine into the exhaust flow, the supercharger creates no additional exhaust backpressure. The amount of power that is lost by a turbo's turbine reduces it's overall efficiency.
Noise
The turbocharger is generally quiter than the supercharger. Because the turbo's turbine is in the exhaust, the turbo can substantially reduce exhaust noise, making the engine run quieter. Some centrifugal superchargers are known to be noisy and whistley which, annoys some drivers (we, however, love it!)
The turbocharger is generally quiter than the supercharger. Because the turbo's turbine is in the exhaust, the turbo can substantially reduce exhaust noise, making the engine run quieter. Some centrifugal superchargers are known to be noisy and whistley which, annoys some drivers (we, however, love it!)
Reliability
In general, superchargers enjoy a substantial reliability advantage over the turbocharger. When a a turbo is shut off (i.e. when the engine is turned off), residual oil inside the turbo's bearings can be baked by stored engine heat. This, combined with the turbo's extremely high rpms (up to 150,000rpm) can cause problems with the turbo's internal bearings and can shorten the life of the turbocharger. In addition, many turbos require aftermarket exhaust manifolds, which are often far less reliable than stock manifolds.
In general, superchargers enjoy a substantial reliability advantage over the turbocharger. When a a turbo is shut off (i.e. when the engine is turned off), residual oil inside the turbo's bearings can be baked by stored engine heat. This, combined with the turbo's extremely high rpms (up to 150,000rpm) can cause problems with the turbo's internal bearings and can shorten the life of the turbocharger. In addition, many turbos require aftermarket exhaust manifolds, which are often far less reliable than stock manifolds.
Ease of Installation
Superchargers are substantially easier to install than a turbos because they have far fewer components and simpler devices. Turbos are complex and require manifold and exhaust modifications, intercoolers, extra oil lines, etc. - most of which is not needed with most superchargers. A novice home mechanic can easily install most supercharger systems, while a turbo installation should be left to a turbo expert.
Superchargers are substantially easier to install than a turbos because they have far fewer components and simpler devices. Turbos are complex and require manifold and exhaust modifications, intercoolers, extra oil lines, etc. - most of which is not needed with most superchargers. A novice home mechanic can easily install most supercharger systems, while a turbo installation should be left to a turbo expert.
Maximum Power Output
Turbos are known for their unique ability to spin to incredibly high rpms and make outrages peak boost figures (25psi+). While operating a turbocharger at very high levels of boost requires major modifications to the rest of the engine, the turbo is capable of producing more peak power than superchargers.
Turbos are known for their unique ability to spin to incredibly high rpms and make outrages peak boost figures (25psi+). While operating a turbocharger at very high levels of boost requires major modifications to the rest of the engine, the turbo is capable of producing more peak power than superchargers.
Tunability
Turbochargers, because they are so complex and rely on exhaust pressure, are notoriously difficult to tune. Superchargers, on the other hand, require few fuel and ignition upgrades and normally require little or no engine tuning.
Turbochargers, because they are so complex and rely on exhaust pressure, are notoriously difficult to tune. Superchargers, on the other hand, require few fuel and ignition upgrades and normally require little or no engine tuning.
Conclusion
While the supercharger is generally considered to be a better method of forced induction for most street and race vehicles, the turbo will always have its place in a more specialized market. Superchargers generally provide a much broader powerband that most drivers are looking for with no "turbo lag". In addition, they are much easier to install and tune, making them more practical for a home or novice mechanic.
Originally Posted by Directfreak
I don't think so.
Even at 9 PSI, my car does 336 RWHP. That's just the wastegate spring,
I can't run any less boost or less power.
At 14 PSI, my car does 409 RWHP. (low boost)
At 18 PSI, my car does 457 RWHP (still on 93 octane),
just stright boost with no water/alcohol injection (yet).
I start making boost at 2000 RPM, and see FULL-ON Bost
by 4200 RPM. I don't have any lag.
I have yet to see even ONE supercharged Rotary setup
even make 250 RWHP.
Even at 9 PSI, my car does 336 RWHP. That's just the wastegate spring,
I can't run any less boost or less power.
At 14 PSI, my car does 409 RWHP. (low boost)
At 18 PSI, my car does 457 RWHP (still on 93 octane),
just stright boost with no water/alcohol injection (yet).
I start making boost at 2000 RPM, and see FULL-ON Bost
by 4200 RPM. I don't have any lag.
I have yet to see even ONE supercharged Rotary setup
even make 250 RWHP.
Originally Posted by DriveFast7
Damn impressive. 457rwhp on pump gas beer keg motor. Got a pic of the intake and exhaust ports for reference?
still the same size as FD's on the inside of the engine.
I did remove the restrictive Cosmo exhaust sleeves and replaced them
with FD sleeves, and mild exhaust porting.
I recently posted a video:
https://www.rx7club.com/1st-generation-specific-1979-1985-18/project-kramer-%2Avideo%2A-high-boost-457452/
Hunting Skylines
Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 3,431
Likes: 4
From: Brisbane, Queensland, Australia.
Some of you might find this interesting... twin-charged 13B. 258kw translates to around 350hp. That's probably close to 400 at the wheels on a Dynojet. This thing must be crazy to drive on the street. I read the whole magazine article and there's some very clever engineering that's gone into this thing.
twin charged 13B
twin charged 13B
Amish Gangsta
Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 432
Likes: 0
From: Woodland Hills, CA
Originally Posted by Directfreak
I don't think so.
EvenI start making boost at 2000 RPM, and see FULL-ON Bost
by 4200 RPM. I don't have any lag.
EvenI start making boost at 2000 RPM, and see FULL-ON Bost
by 4200 RPM. I don't have any lag.
Comparing SC's to turbos is apples to oranges comparison, yes they are both fruit, but they don't taste the same.
That's Weak Sause
Joined: May 2004
Posts: 464
Likes: 0
From: Idaho
Some people like to think SCs better for auto-x because there's alot of times that the engine isn't in the upper revs, and with the SC having boost at the touch of the throttle helps with the low end such as corners or short straights where you can't get a turbo to spool, unless you're Directfreak who builds boost even at low revs.
I myself am going to build both a 12a SC and a 13b turbo, just for ***** and giggles, put the two engines into to identical 7s and then see what the exact difference is. That and I want to see what a person can do to build more power with a SC rotary.
=Eric
I myself am going to build both a 12a SC and a 13b turbo, just for ***** and giggles, put the two engines into to identical 7s and then see what the exact difference is. That and I want to see what a person can do to build more power with a SC rotary.
=Eric