Turbo or Super Charged? Pros and Cons of both
01-09-2007, 03:44 PM
#82
not trying to win, just trying to explain 
well kinda, but you have the term wrong.
But anyway it depends on what you mean by "lag" because that word gets misused all the time - even I misuse it sometimes depending on the point I'm making or how specific I'm being, but since we're being specific...
the moment you put your foot down on the gas, depending on the rpm, a turbo will take a tiny fraction of a second to build up exhaust pressure to get the turbo to even react. It's even smaller at higher rpms. On the Z, even at 4000 rpms, it's pretty damn quick - almost instant.
That tiny fraction of a second is the true meaning of the word "lag" and ALL turbos have it, otherwise they're not a turbo
The fact that when it DOES react, that it pushes you back in the seat with a gigantic amount of boost is a different thing all together
Overall the tradeoff in delay is worth the tiny fraction of a second delay where you have to wait (if you even call it waiting since it's pretty fast) for the turbo to give you boost
no matter what kind they are, SC's will instantly react and have no lag because they're basically a part of the engine's crankshaft if you think about it. In the case of a centrifugal, it may or may not give you much boost depending on what rpm you're in
What you're thinking "lag" is, is like when you look at a dynochart and see on the graph how the power starts off like NA, then seeing how fast it swoops up.
This is called "turbo spool" and that's what you're actually meaning when you've been using the term lag
the turbos kits for the Z will always spool up sooner than a centrifugal SC can.
However a Roots blower like the stillen i fully spooled up the instant you go WOT at any rpm - even idle
here's a link btw:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Supercharger
halfway into the "Supercharging and Turbocharging" section
Originally Posted by doug
however i will state the fact i already made... SC's having less lag than turbo's is a myth
But anyway it depends on what you mean by "lag" because that word gets misused all the time - even I misuse it sometimes depending on the point I'm making or how specific I'm being, but since we're being specific...
the moment you put your foot down on the gas, depending on the rpm, a turbo will take a tiny fraction of a second to build up exhaust pressure to get the turbo to even react. It's even smaller at higher rpms. On the Z, even at 4000 rpms, it's pretty damn quick - almost instant.
That tiny fraction of a second is the true meaning of the word "lag" and ALL turbos have it, otherwise they're not a turbo
The fact that when it DOES react, that it pushes you back in the seat with a gigantic amount of boost is a different thing all together
Overall the tradeoff in delay is worth the tiny fraction of a second delay where you have to wait (if you even call it waiting since it's pretty fast) for the turbo to give you boost
no matter what kind they are, SC's will instantly react and have no lag because they're basically a part of the engine's crankshaft if you think about it. In the case of a centrifugal, it may or may not give you much boost depending on what rpm you're in
What you're thinking "lag" is, is like when you look at a dynochart and see on the graph how the power starts off like NA, then seeing how fast it swoops up.
This is called "turbo spool" and that's what you're actually meaning when you've been using the term lag
the turbos kits for the Z will always spool up sooner than a centrifugal SC can.
However a Roots blower like the stillen i fully spooled up the instant you go WOT at any rpm - even idle
here's a link btw:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Supercharger
halfway into the "Supercharging and Turbocharging" section
Last edited by sentry65; 01-09-2007 at 04:21 PM.
01-09-2007, 04:03 PM
#84
maximumsportZ, I don't think any turbo on the Z has much lag at all (as explained in my above post) - even the ST's which have the most isn't very much really
I do think SC's have "less" lag but it's almost negligible it's such a minor difference.
the turbo spool's amount of boost is absolutely huge though and the only way I can get my vortech to be remotely competitive at mid rpms in terms of accelleration is adding all those other mods I have
if we did a theoretical race like that you'd be around 4050 rpms in 3rd gear, I'd be at 4540 rpms in 3rd gear with 10.7% more gear tq from my gearing (you're on the stock final drive right?)
your dyno is a dynojet dyno, so all I can do is guess how our numbers compare.
I do think SC's have "less" lag but it's almost negligible it's such a minor difference.
the turbo spool's amount of boost is absolutely huge though and the only way I can get my vortech to be remotely competitive at mid rpms in terms of accelleration is adding all those other mods I have
if we did a theoretical race like that you'd be around 4050 rpms in 3rd gear, I'd be at 4540 rpms in 3rd gear with 10.7% more gear tq from my gearing (you're on the stock final drive right?)
your dyno is a dynojet dyno, so all I can do is guess how our numbers compare.
Last edited by sentry65; 01-09-2007 at 04:37 PM.
01-09-2007, 05:50 PM
#85
all this talk about tq and area under the curve, have any of you guys ever thought about for an F1 race car to have 800hp @ 19000 rpms, it'd only have around 221 tq at the wheels at that rpm?
Their peak tq is otherwise probably in the neighborhood of around 300 tq @ 10000 rpms
not what I'd call a torque monster, but we all know they're beyond fast
not that it matters in relation to our cars the redline at 6600-7000 rpms
Their peak tq is otherwise probably in the neighborhood of around 300 tq @ 10000 rpms
not what I'd call a torque monster, but we all know they're beyond fast
not that it matters in relation to our cars the redline at 6600-7000 rpms
Last edited by sentry65; 01-09-2007 at 05:58 PM.
01-09-2007, 08:02 PM
#86
Turbo Whore
iTrader: (4)
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: West suburbs of Chi-town
Posts: 7,303
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
Originally Posted by sentry65
maximumsportZ, I don't think any turbo on the Z has much lag at all (as explained in my above post) - even the ST's which have the most isn't very much really
I do think SC's have "less" lag but it's almost negligible it's such a minor difference.
the turbo spool's amount of boost is absolutely huge though and the only way I can get my vortech to be remotely competitive at mid rpms in terms of accelleration is adding all those other mods I have
if we did a theoretical race like that you'd be around 4050 rpms in 3rd gear, I'd be at 4540 rpms in 3rd gear with 10.7% more gear tq from my gearing (you're on the stock final drive right?)
your dyno is a dynojet dyno, so all I can do is guess how our numbers compare.
I do think SC's have "less" lag but it's almost negligible it's such a minor difference.
the turbo spool's amount of boost is absolutely huge though and the only way I can get my vortech to be remotely competitive at mid rpms in terms of accelleration is adding all those other mods I have
if we did a theoretical race like that you'd be around 4050 rpms in 3rd gear, I'd be at 4540 rpms in 3rd gear with 10.7% more gear tq from my gearing (you're on the stock final drive right?)
your dyno is a dynojet dyno, so all I can do is guess how our numbers compare.
Run your car at the track and trap 120mph+ and then you might have a chance against him. His setup is pretty much identical to mine besides his better flowing exhaust.
The fact is, properly sized turbochargers will always have an advantage over a Centrifigual S/C at the same peak boost level just based on area under the curve. I reach peak boost before 3000rpms and hold it all the way until rev-limiter and the hp climbs the entire way.
Last edited by BriGuyMax; 01-09-2007 at 08:04 PM.
01-09-2007, 08:09 PM
#88
Turbo Whore
iTrader: (4)
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: West suburbs of Chi-town
Posts: 7,303
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
Originally Posted by jonb7007
That sounds like the challenge that can end this SC vs Turbo once and for all!!
It shouldn't even be a debate....show me all the S/Ced Zs that run 11s or quicker. I personally haven't heard of ANY.
01-09-2007, 08:16 PM
#89
^^ Uh it was a joke, trying to amp up a race.. but I will say that not many on here want a SC, also most Z owners prefer turbo over sc because you get way more bang for your buck!! Bottom line... Also turbo is exhaust fed, SC is yada yada etc.. etc. which has been covered five million times....
There is an 11 sec SC Z on here I can guarantee that, I would be willing to put my SC on it.. lol Oh, and of course you are turbo..... I am not leaning toward any side.. I could care less.. Everyone has there own preference....
There is an 11 sec SC Z on here I can guarantee that, I would be willing to put my SC on it.. lol Oh, and of course you are turbo..... I am not leaning toward any side.. I could care less.. Everyone has there own preference....
01-09-2007, 08:31 PM
#90
Originally Posted by BriGuyMax
Run your car at the track and trap 120mph+ and then you might have a chance against him. His setup is pretty much identical to mine besides his better flowing exhaust.
The fact is, properly sized turbochargers will always have an advantage over a Centrifigual S/C at the same peak boost level just based on area under the curve. I reach peak boost before 3000rpms and hold it all the way until rev-limiter and the hp climbs the entire way.
The fact is, properly sized turbochargers will always have an advantage over a Centrifigual S/C at the same peak boost level just based on area under the curve. I reach peak boost before 3000rpms and hold it all the way until rev-limiter and the hp climbs the entire way.
maximumsportZ has a clear and distinct advantage from 3500-5000 rpms based on this innaccurate dyno comparison. After that it's pretty close with my car possibly having the upper hand from 5200 rpms and onward on this graph comparison alone. Even if my tq curve read 5% higher on a dynojet he'd still have the advantage in the 2500-4000 rpm range. Not the most useful rpm range in a drag race, but still an advantage nonetheless.
If my dyno was on a dynojet, I think I might possibly come out ahead. Possibly even having more overall area under the curve from 3500 to redline.
I mean I don't know, but that's what this graph is telling me.
Anyway, it's just a graph - his dyno and my dyno that are completely incompatible. They're somewhat comparable cars to say the least. Again, there's a million factors that aren't making this a very fair comparison, so I don't even know how anyone can be so sure of anything when you're guessing at best. I don't know what my car traps in the 1/4 mile yet.
While I agree that an 8psi TT will outdo an 8 psi vortech with no sweat, I'm running 12 psi. Then there's the other factors like weight, rotational mass, gearing, etc. It'd be mature for someone to admit that if you give a SC Z enough power, it might overcome even an Z with an "inivncible" turbo. A low 360whp turbo Z won't win against a high 500+SC Z. Surely someone has to realize this. It's a per case basis.
Generally a typical turbo car will beat a typical SC car.
I guess I just don't think of my Z as a typical <400whp vortech Z...
It's not like I think my car is unbeatable or anything. I really have no problem admitting defeat. But if say Alberto can hit 11's on ET streets with with
Originally Posted by Alberto
LESS than 400whp to hit 11's, and in less than ideal conditions
then I think if you take the driver out of the equation, my car should be probably just as capable
Last edited by sentry65; 01-09-2007 at 09:01 PM.
01-09-2007, 09:03 PM
#92
Turbo Whore
iTrader: (4)
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: West suburbs of Chi-town
Posts: 7,303
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
Originally Posted by sentry65
well let's overlay his dynojet dyno against my dyno dynamics dyno then - which is tipping the scale in his favor (by 4-6%???). I put some dots where my power probably is at 12 psi without the belt slipping. If I was on a dynojet, my tq would probably be around 390 and stay there to redline...you guys can recalculate the hp curve based on that
maximumsportZ has a clear and distinct advantage from 3500-5000 rpms based on this innaccurate dyno comparison. After that it's pretty close with my car possibly having the upper hand. Even if my tq curve read 5% higher on a dynojet he'd still have the advantage in the 2500-4000 rpm range. Not the most useful rpm range in a drag race, but still an advantage nonetheless.
If my dyno was on a dynojet, I think I might possibly come out ahead. Possibly even having more overall area under the curve from 3500 to redline.
I mean I don't know, but that's what this graph is telling me.
Anyway, it's just a graph - his dyno and my dyno that are completely incompatible. They're somewhat comparable cars to say the least. Again, there's a million factors that aren't making this a very fair comparison, so I don't even know how anyone can be so sure of anything when you're guessing at best. I don't know what my car traps in the 1/4 mile yet.
While I agree that an 8psi TT will outdo an 8 psi vortech with no sweat, I'm running 12 psi. Then there's the other factors like weight, rotational mass, gearing, etc. It'd be mature for someone to admit that if you give a SC Z enough power, it might overcome even an Z with an "inivncible" turbo. A low 360whp turbo Z won't win against a high 500+SC Z. Surely someone has to realize this. It's a per case basis.
Generally a typical turbo car will beat a typical SC car.
I guess I just don't think of my Z as a typical <400whp vortech Z...
It's not like I think my car is unbeatable or anything. I really have no problem admitting defeat. But if say Alberto can hit 11's on ET streets with with according to https://my350z.com/forum/showpost.ph...89&postcount=4
then I think if you take the driver out of the equation, my car should be probably just as capable
maximumsportZ has a clear and distinct advantage from 3500-5000 rpms based on this innaccurate dyno comparison. After that it's pretty close with my car possibly having the upper hand. Even if my tq curve read 5% higher on a dynojet he'd still have the advantage in the 2500-4000 rpm range. Not the most useful rpm range in a drag race, but still an advantage nonetheless.
If my dyno was on a dynojet, I think I might possibly come out ahead. Possibly even having more overall area under the curve from 3500 to redline.
I mean I don't know, but that's what this graph is telling me.
Anyway, it's just a graph - his dyno and my dyno that are completely incompatible. They're somewhat comparable cars to say the least. Again, there's a million factors that aren't making this a very fair comparison, so I don't even know how anyone can be so sure of anything when you're guessing at best. I don't know what my car traps in the 1/4 mile yet.
While I agree that an 8psi TT will outdo an 8 psi vortech with no sweat, I'm running 12 psi. Then there's the other factors like weight, rotational mass, gearing, etc. It'd be mature for someone to admit that if you give a SC Z enough power, it might overcome even an Z with an "inivncible" turbo. A low 360whp turbo Z won't win against a high 500+SC Z. Surely someone has to realize this. It's a per case basis.
Generally a typical turbo car will beat a typical SC car.
I guess I just don't think of my Z as a typical <400whp vortech Z...
It's not like I think my car is unbeatable or anything. I really have no problem admitting defeat. But if say Alberto can hit 11's on ET streets with with according to https://my350z.com/forum/showpost.ph...89&postcount=4
then I think if you take the driver out of the equation, my car should be probably just as capable
01-09-2007, 09:18 PM
#94
Turbo Whore
iTrader: (4)
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: West suburbs of Chi-town
Posts: 7,303
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
Originally Posted by sentry65
my dyno is ricer math now, ok 
I see how it is
I see how it is
01-09-2007, 09:25 PM
#95
ok then we'll solve this:
pretend the dots are not there (did you not see the original curves still there?)
pretend my car isn't very powerful (easier on your ego
)
pretend I'm not making 12 psi (because my gauge is surely lying to me)
and then there's no need to get so worked up
really sorry man, didn't mean to pee in your cheerios or anything
if your car is so powerful, you shouldn't even be concerned with me. Afterall, I haven't run the 1/4 at my local track yet.
pretend the dots are not there (did you not see the original curves still there?)
pretend my car isn't very powerful (easier on your ego
)pretend I'm not making 12 psi (because my gauge is surely lying to me)
and then there's no need to get so worked up
really sorry man, didn't mean to pee in your cheerios or anything
if your car is so powerful, you shouldn't even be concerned with me. Afterall, I haven't run the 1/4 at my local track yet.
Last edited by sentry65; 01-09-2007 at 09:32 PM.
01-09-2007, 09:29 PM
#96
Turbo Whore
iTrader: (4)
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: West suburbs of Chi-town
Posts: 7,303
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
Originally Posted by sentry65
ok then we'll solve this:
pretend the dots are not there
pretend my car isn't very powerful
pretend I'm not making 12 psi
and then there's no need to get so worked up
didn't mean to pee in your cheerios
pretend the dots are not there
pretend my car isn't very powerful
pretend I'm not making 12 psi
and then there's no need to get so worked up
didn't mean to pee in your cheerios
I don't see where I got worked up. I'm not the guy with the supercharged dyno queen that's out to prove something to the turbo crowd.
You putting up an 11.50 would be peeing in my cheerios...and I think that's damn near impossible.
01-09-2007, 09:32 PM
#97
Registered User
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Room full of blood
Posts: 2,422
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
This thread is stupid....
As someone of a more or less scientific background, I want to say one thing.
Data manipulation and extrapolation is whaen you already know the answer and are trying to stuff all the date to fit the answer that you already have.
Actual testing is what it's all about.....
I just killed 3 6-packs ofg Red Stripe and a bottel of Appleton with a friend of mione...
As someone of a more or less scientific background, I want to say one thing.
Data manipulation and extrapolation is whaen you already know the answer and are trying to stuff all the date to fit the answer that you already have.
Actual testing is what it's all about.....
I just killed 3 6-packs ofg Red Stripe and a bottel of Appleton with a friend of mione...
01-09-2007, 09:39 PM
#99
Originally Posted by BriGuyMax
I don't see where I got worked up. I'm not the guy with the supercharged dyno queen that's out to prove something to the turbo crowd.
You putting up an 11.50 would be peeing in my cheerios...and I think that's damn near impossible.
You putting up an 11.50 would be peeing in my cheerios...and I think that's damn near impossible.
01-09-2007, 09:43 PM
#100
Turbo Whore
iTrader: (4)
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: West suburbs of Chi-town
Posts: 7,303
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
Originally Posted by sentry65
No, I post my dyno to show people a vortech can at least get some fair amount of torque. Then the turbo people come in saying the area under the curve is all that matters and nothing else. And I don't agree that nothing else matters because other things do matter. Then it gets into a pissing war
I'm going to bed. Do yourself a favor..put the car on a strip and see what happens. Maybe you can shut us all up....