Turbo or Super Charged? Pros and Cons of both
01-10-2007, 08:14 AM
#121
Originally Posted by doug
who's dyno is that? thats not a true 10 PSI APS TT Dyno
dude, no one here gets the pointI don't know how else to say it, so I'll try it this way:
10 psi turbo is better than 10 psi SC
...at least when you look at the what the boost gauge readout says. Just stop looking at the psi for a moment, I've already tried explaining how PSI on a SC setup is a variable number dependent on how much the exhaust etc flows while a turbo is a constant psi because of the wastegate. It's completely possible for someone to have a SC with "4" psi outperform a turbo kit with 12 psi. All it takes is a much bigger engine and more open exhaust for the SC's finite air volume to not have an effect on the boost pressure sensor as much...however a turbo will simply bleed off less air out the wastegate and instead send it into the engine until the wastegate spring's psi threshold has been reached.
it's exactly one of the reasons a corvette C6 vortech kit comes with a more powerful T-trim blower instead of the small 350Z kit's blower. It's better matched to the engine's flow and it's actually NEEDED to reach the same stock "8" psi because 6 liters is a bit bigger than 3.5 liters
This is part of the reason why exhaust mods add so much more power to a turbo setup than a SC - because the turbo is actually pumping more air volume INTO then engine when you open up the exhaust which drops the pressure. The turbo maintains the PSI according to the wastegate spring
Look at an EVO and STI. Those cars are producing WAY more boost in stock form than your Z. Does that mean they perform better than your car????
Think about it. Does it??? ...nope
opening the exhaust up is kinda a similar thing to running a bigger engine as far as the wastegate on a turbo is concerned, only you're increasing efficiency instead of size.
What I've been saying is for someone who goes out and buys a vortech/ATI SC, they can push it high enough so the whp/tq levels are high enough to at least compete with a basic turbo setup. That's been my point all along. The premise here has been that there could be a theoretical 1000whp Z with a supercharger and it'll lose to a turbo 350whp Z just because it has a turbo and that's BS.
I say just look at the dynos and 1/4 mile times and stop trying to compare PSI because there's a lot of people running 10-12 psi vortechs on the stock block now with different levels of intake/exhaust mods for awhile just the same as lots of people running 5.8-9psi on the stock block with a turbo.
What stops people from going nuts with adding more boost is they look at their dyno numbers and realize they're already pretty high for the stock engine. They don't say "I'm not stopping until I reach X amount of psi
I've pushed my car about as far as I'm willing to on the stock block but I could go for more power if I wanted. Vortech does make a T-trim blower that puts out more power just like for instance TN makes their fabled 2.0 kit for people who want more power.
Last edited by sentry65; 01-10-2007 at 11:29 AM.
01-10-2007, 08:42 AM
#122
dude.. why must you write 10 paragraphs to answer 1 simple question? are you tryin to convince yourself or something? you show a dyno of an APS system vs yours @ 10 PSI.. all i meerly asked you was where did you get the dyno.. thats all i asked you man.. i didnt ask you all the other 10 million questions you typed in 50 paragraphs.. just answer the damn dyno question..
i am hoping you are not married.. because if everytime your wife asks you a question and you give a 5 min answer.. she must thing you are guilty of something
i am hoping you are not married.. because if everytime your wife asks you a question and you give a 5 min answer.. she must thing you are guilty of something
01-10-2007, 08:46 AM
#123
it's because you didn't read my post - stock APS ST boost tuned with most likely a plenum, exhaust and HF cats from what I remember
I got the dyno from someone a few months ago on the local AZ Z forum or on 350Zmotoring - don't remember. He posted it one of those places.
My wife actually understands the differences between psi and air volume flow btw. She's actually capable of schooling quite a few people even though she's not really a car person...Let's not take things down to that level ok?
I got the dyno from someone a few months ago on the local AZ Z forum or on 350Zmotoring - don't remember. He posted it one of those places.
My wife actually understands the differences between psi and air volume flow btw. She's actually capable of schooling quite a few people even though she's not really a car person...Let's not take things down to that level ok?
Last edited by sentry65; 01-10-2007 at 10:39 AM.
01-10-2007, 08:51 AM
#125
Originally Posted by sentry65
it's because you didn't read my post - stock APS ST boost tuned with most likely a plenum, exhaust and HF cats from what I remember
Originally Posted by sentry65
I got the dyno from someone a few months ago on the local AZ Z forum. He posted it there.
Originally Posted by sentry65
My wife actually understands the differences between psi and air volume flow btw. She's actually capable of schooling quite a few people
01-10-2007, 09:13 AM
#126
Registered User
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Ohio
Posts: 91
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
This thread for the win.
I love how you compare two systems like supercharging/turbo charging based only on the kits that are available for your application. Its sad but when people who consider themselves "Tuners" argue based on pre-made kits I find it funny. The theory behind both Centrifugal -superchargers and turbos is well documented but no one on here has even mentioned the biggest limiting factor of the supercharger setup for the 350Z. Its the only factor that says turbo > supercharger as far as power is concerned on the VQ motor. That being said the current power of superchargers on 350Z's is weak and they could go alot higher but they will never beat a proper turbo setup (Single or twin) for overall power.
P.S.
Doug said a turbo has less lag then a supercharger and because of that he should be removed from this discussion as well as anyone else that agrees with him. Why? Simple, he posted dyno graphs and anyone who has actually driven a car at a real racetrack *Mid-Ohio, Miller Park, VIR, Etc* can tell you that has nothing to do with lag. When people talk about "turbo lag" its often throttle response before you get power and in a turbo car you have to re-spool the turbo in order to get boost again. Do you think superchargers have to re-spool? No, they run of a belt so as soon as you hit the gas your back into the power. This makes a huge diffrence on a racetrack and even more in AutoX. So please if you are going to post such non-sense please understand physics before posting.
Thanks your friend
-Fishey.
I love how you compare two systems like supercharging/turbo charging based only on the kits that are available for your application. Its sad but when people who consider themselves "Tuners" argue based on pre-made kits I find it funny. The theory behind both Centrifugal -superchargers and turbos is well documented but no one on here has even mentioned the biggest limiting factor of the supercharger setup for the 350Z. Its the only factor that says turbo > supercharger as far as power is concerned on the VQ motor. That being said the current power of superchargers on 350Z's is weak and they could go alot higher but they will never beat a proper turbo setup (Single or twin) for overall power.
P.S.
Doug said a turbo has less lag then a supercharger and because of that he should be removed from this discussion as well as anyone else that agrees with him. Why? Simple, he posted dyno graphs and anyone who has actually driven a car at a real racetrack *Mid-Ohio, Miller Park, VIR, Etc* can tell you that has nothing to do with lag. When people talk about "turbo lag" its often throttle response before you get power and in a turbo car you have to re-spool the turbo in order to get boost again. Do you think superchargers have to re-spool? No, they run of a belt so as soon as you hit the gas your back into the power. This makes a huge diffrence on a racetrack and even more in AutoX. So please if you are going to post such non-sense please understand physics before posting.
Thanks your friend
-Fishey.
Last edited by Fishey; 01-10-2007 at 09:15 AM.
01-10-2007, 09:23 AM
#127
Originally Posted by doug
so you jumped from TT to ST... to which that APS ST we have no idea if it has an APS Exhuast or Forged Actuators so it might be experiencing boost drop...
ok so post the dyno
ok so post the dyno
I don't think it was a big exhaust. I think they switched over from being NA and just had enough money to get the ST and install.
As I said, it's the best direct comparison with my car I've come across so far since the dyno and location are the same
Originally Posted by doug
i wasn't talking about your knowledge... i was talking about your need to make a 1 line answer turn into a 20 line answer.. if its one thing i learned from law classes in college... "answer the questions you are asked"
Last edited by sentry65; 01-10-2007 at 11:35 AM.
01-10-2007, 09:30 AM
#128
Originally Posted by Fishey
P.S.
Doug said a turbo has less lag then a supercharger and because of that he should be removed from this discussion as well as anyone else that agrees with him. Why? Simple, he posted dyno graphs and anyone who has actually driven a car at a real racetrack *Mid-Ohio, Miller Park, VIR, Etc* can tell you that has nothing to do with lag. When people talk about "turbo lag" its often throttle response before you get power and in a turbo car you have to re-spool the turbo in order to get boost again. Do you think superchargers have to re-spool? No, they run of a belt so as soon as you hit the gas your back into the power. This makes a huge diffrence on a racetrack and even more in AutoX. So please if you are going to post such non-sense please understand physics before posting.
Thanks your friend
-Fishey.
Doug said a turbo has less lag then a supercharger and because of that he should be removed from this discussion as well as anyone else that agrees with him. Why? Simple, he posted dyno graphs and anyone who has actually driven a car at a real racetrack *Mid-Ohio, Miller Park, VIR, Etc* can tell you that has nothing to do with lag. When people talk about "turbo lag" its often throttle response before you get power and in a turbo car you have to re-spool the turbo in order to get boost again. Do you think superchargers have to re-spool? No, they run of a belt so as soon as you hit the gas your back into the power. This makes a huge diffrence on a racetrack and even more in AutoX. So please if you are going to post such non-sense please understand physics before posting.
Thanks your friend
-Fishey.
how is it that two cars... same exact cars... one with a turbo.. one with a supercharger.. the turbo car is making more down low power, mid range power and top end power than the supercharger? according to your explanation.. the turbo car should have had less power until mid range.
again.. if you read what i wrote.. i did not say turbo's don't have lag.. i said.. and i say it again... SC's having less lag than turbo's is a myth
01-10-2007, 09:35 AM
#129
Just some more points to bring up - not responding to anyone in particular, just some things I thought of while driving to work this morning.
oxygen going into the engine and then it igniting with gas is what creates power. Not PSI.
as far as the options on kits and how far they can be pushed on the Z/G, you can run a turbo which will produce more oxygen molecules per psi because of efficiency and lower intake temps, or you can run an overdriven centrifugal SC that overall can be made to pretty much pump the same number of oxygen molecules into the engine with higher air intake temps
The stillen blower has it's limitations so it never really will outperform a turbo in sheer oxygen volume going into the engine
The centrifugal SC blower naturally runs cooler than a turbo. It's spinning at 1/3-1/2 the rpms of a turbo and thus creates less heat. You can put your hand flat on the blower 1 minute after going WOT for 15 minutes on a dyno without it being hot enough to hurt. So you can overdrive it, which even though it's not as efficient, you can run more psi to equal the same oxygen volume as what a turbo might put out at lower psi. It'll make the blower work harder and produce slightly more heat than the stock psi level, but it's completely do-able. The air temp going into the engine will be hotter, but overall the engine bay will be cooler because even an overdriven vortech/ATI blower won't output nearly the same heat that turbos will. The engine bay in a turbo Z becomes a complete oven. The vortech feels maybe a little warmer than stock temps in the engine bay
As Fishey said - I agree, turbos will ultimately have the most potential. A vortech/ATI will run out of headroom much sooner than a turbo setup where things start running into diminishing returns where the air going in the engine starts becoming too hot to make an improvement in power (oxygen volume)
and just another example of PSI not telling the whole story between different setups. You can fill a coke can with 8 psi of water and you can fill a school gymnasium (waterproof
) with 0 psi of liquid. The gym will have more water to drink, it just won't be pressurized
oxygen going into the engine and then it igniting with gas is what creates power. Not PSI.
as far as the options on kits and how far they can be pushed on the Z/G, you can run a turbo which will produce more oxygen molecules per psi because of efficiency and lower intake temps, or you can run an overdriven centrifugal SC that overall can be made to pretty much pump the same number of oxygen molecules into the engine with higher air intake temps
The stillen blower has it's limitations so it never really will outperform a turbo in sheer oxygen volume going into the engine
The centrifugal SC blower naturally runs cooler than a turbo. It's spinning at 1/3-1/2 the rpms of a turbo and thus creates less heat. You can put your hand flat on the blower 1 minute after going WOT for 15 minutes on a dyno without it being hot enough to hurt. So you can overdrive it, which even though it's not as efficient, you can run more psi to equal the same oxygen volume as what a turbo might put out at lower psi. It'll make the blower work harder and produce slightly more heat than the stock psi level, but it's completely do-able. The air temp going into the engine will be hotter, but overall the engine bay will be cooler because even an overdriven vortech/ATI blower won't output nearly the same heat that turbos will. The engine bay in a turbo Z becomes a complete oven. The vortech feels maybe a little warmer than stock temps in the engine bay
As Fishey said - I agree, turbos will ultimately have the most potential. A vortech/ATI will run out of headroom much sooner than a turbo setup where things start running into diminishing returns where the air going in the engine starts becoming too hot to make an improvement in power (oxygen volume)
and just another example of PSI not telling the whole story between different setups. You can fill a coke can with 8 psi of water and you can fill a school gymnasium (waterproof
) with 0 psi of liquid. The gym will have more water to drink, it just won't be pressurized
Last edited by sentry65; 01-10-2007 at 11:35 AM.
01-10-2007, 09:39 AM
#131
Originally Posted by doug
since i am dumb and stupid.. then please explain this to me..
how is it that two cars... same exact cars... one with a turbo.. one with a supercharger.. the turbo car is making more down low power, mid range power and top end power than the supercharger? according to your explanation.. the turbo car should have had less power until mid range.
again.. if you read what i wrote.. i did not say turbo's don't have lag.. i said.. and i say it again... SC's having less lag than turbo's is a myth
how is it that two cars... same exact cars... one with a turbo.. one with a supercharger.. the turbo car is making more down low power, mid range power and top end power than the supercharger? according to your explanation.. the turbo car should have had less power until mid range.
again.. if you read what i wrote.. i did not say turbo's don't have lag.. i said.. and i say it again... SC's having less lag than turbo's is a myth
not "turbo spool" which is what you're talking about
he's correct in what he's saying
turbos have "lag"
have you ever heard of anti-lag?
it's where the turbo actually is constantly spooled under a load other than throttle inputs (lots of heat BTW) and redirects the unused air out
Then and ONLY then will a turbo have ZERO lag
the suburu P2 concept car has anti-lag. It's pretty much a racecar only technology at this point - to my knowledge
Last edited by sentry65; 01-10-2007 at 09:42 AM.
01-10-2007, 10:12 AM
#132
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
so can we agree that my track is handicapped compared to your track to SOME degree due to elevation??
call it an excuse if you want, but this is something that can't really be argued, there's less oxygen here than where you run
call it an excuse if you want, but this is something that can't really be argued, there's less oxygen here than where you run
500 feet is bascially nothing. I'll give you a 1/2 tenth E.T. handicap and a 1/2 mph handicap. I shouldn't even be doing that since we have much more humid air around here (LESS SEPERATED O2). The fact is, I ran 11s in REALLY bad conditions around here. The DA was over 2500ft and it was very humid. You could easily run in better conditions (lower DA) than that down there (especially in the winter)...so just do it and stop whining.
As for the whole debate...I don't think you have been able to comprehend what I've been saying. I'm saying with EQUAL peak power on a S/Cer setup to a turbo setup..the S/Ced car will lose. Prove me wrong...you have more power than I do (my car made 430whp on a dynapack), so pick a good day and show me some 122+ mph traps...
01-10-2007, 10:19 AM
#133
Originally Posted by sentry65
he's talking about the true meaning of the word "lag" as in how reactive a turbo is from no throttle to full throttle
not "turbo spool" which is what you're talking about
he's correct in what he's saying
turbos have "lag"
have you ever heard of anti-lag?
it's where the turbo actually is constantly spooled under a load other than throttle inputs (lots of heat BTW) and redirects the unused air out
Then and ONLY then will a turbo have ZERO lag
the suburu P2 concept car has anti-lag. It's pretty much a racecar only technology at this point - to my knowledge
not "turbo spool" which is what you're talking about
he's correct in what he's saying
turbos have "lag"
have you ever heard of anti-lag?
it's where the turbo actually is constantly spooled under a load other than throttle inputs (lots of heat BTW) and redirects the unused air out
Then and ONLY then will a turbo have ZERO lag
the suburu P2 concept car has anti-lag. It's pretty much a racecar only technology at this point - to my knowledge
again.. if you read what i wrote.. i did not say turbo's don't have lag.. i said.. and i say it again... SC's having less lag than turbo's is a myth
01-10-2007, 10:28 AM
#134
Originally Posted by BriGuyMax
As for the whole debate...I don't think you have been able to comprehend what I've been saying. I'm saying with EQUAL peak power on a S/Cer setup to a turbo setup..the S/Ced car will lose. Prove me wrong...you have more power than I do (my car made 430whp on a dynapack), so pick a good day and show me some 122+ mph traps...
I also believe that at equal peak whp, a turbo wins because it has more area under the curve. What I was saying earlier was there's more to going fast than only area under the curve. It seemed to me doug was comparing his car to mine saying area under the curve is all that matters and I felt the need to say I have other factors on my car to help close that gap - which is up in the air with two totally different locations and correction factors
as far as my trap speeds, yeah I dunno. I'm not wanting a handicap, just an understanding that even the 1/4 mile between two different tracks are going to produce different times with the same car - which I know you understand. That it's still just a ballpark measurement kinda like a dyno unless we obviously lined our cars up at the same track
Dynapak dynos typically read the highest of all dynos, but yeah I know, it's all relative. You can go find a different dyno and dyno lower and I could find a different dyno and dyno higher for all we know
Last edited by sentry65; 01-10-2007 at 10:36 AM.
01-10-2007, 10:29 AM
#135
Originally Posted by doug
read my last post and tell me where i said turbo's don't have any lag
Originally Posted by doug
since i am dumb and stupid.. then please explain this to me..
how is it that two cars... same exact cars... one with a turbo.. one with a supercharger.. the turbo car is making more down low power, mid range power and top end power than the supercharger? according to your explanation.. the turbo car should have had less power until mid range.
again.. if you read what i wrote.. i did not say turbo's don't have lag.. i said.. and i say it again... SC's having less lag than turbo's is a myth
how is it that two cars... same exact cars... one with a turbo.. one with a supercharger.. the turbo car is making more down low power, mid range power and top end power than the supercharger? according to your explanation.. the turbo car should have had less power until mid range.
again.. if you read what i wrote.. i did not say turbo's don't have lag.. i said.. and i say it again... SC's having less lag than turbo's is a myth
SC's do have less lag technically by the true meaning of the word. SC's have zero lag, they're attached dirrectly to the engine. Turbos react indirectly to what the crankshaft is doing.
I'm not explaining it again...
turbos spool up faster/earlier though than centrifugals (not roots/twin screw though)
Last edited by sentry65; 01-10-2007 at 10:32 AM.
01-10-2007, 10:56 AM
#138
here's another comparison of the APS TT from ZZtop's Z
his car is bone stock with bone stock APS TT tune - nothing else
below that is a stock dyno
sorry kinda sloppy. The Dynocomp logo was on top of that part of the tq curve that I tried to draw in what it looked like it would be. I did this awhile ago so I can't undo it unless I find the original jpeg
His thread for reference:
https://my350z.com/forum/forced-induction/123098-aps-tt-dyno-comp-a.html
2nd graph is ZZtop with an APS 2.5 inch dual exhaust at about 8.8 psi and nothing else
(I dotted what looked like where his graph was heading since it didn't go to redline - hope that's not "ricer math")
His thread on that for reference:
https://my350z.com/forum/forced-induction/127599-aps-exhaust-installed.html
BTW Dynocomp specializes in APS TT installs and tuning on the Z
I still haven't found that ST graph yet. I'm at work and some images are blocked for some reason - usually if they're embeded within a thread instead of attached.
I did find this thread though, can someone post this guys graph here? I know it's there, but I can't view it at work
http://www.350zmotoring.com/forums/s...light=dynocomp
his car is bone stock with bone stock APS TT tune - nothing else
below that is a stock dyno
sorry kinda sloppy. The Dynocomp logo was on top of that part of the tq curve that I tried to draw in what it looked like it would be. I did this awhile ago so I can't undo it unless I find the original jpeg
His thread for reference:
https://my350z.com/forum/forced-induction/123098-aps-tt-dyno-comp-a.html
2nd graph is ZZtop with an APS 2.5 inch dual exhaust at about 8.8 psi and nothing else
(I dotted what looked like where his graph was heading since it didn't go to redline - hope that's not "ricer math")
His thread on that for reference:
https://my350z.com/forum/forced-induction/127599-aps-exhaust-installed.html
BTW Dynocomp specializes in APS TT installs and tuning on the Z
I still haven't found that ST graph yet. I'm at work and some images are blocked for some reason - usually if they're embeded within a thread instead of attached.
I did find this thread though, can someone post this guys graph here? I know it's there, but I can't view it at work
http://www.350zmotoring.com/forums/s...light=dynocomp
Last edited by sentry65; 01-10-2007 at 12:41 PM.
01-10-2007, 10:57 AM
#139
Originally Posted by doug
so if SC's have no lag and TC have lag..
why is it i build more power than you in every RPM till 6000 where your high HP shows uP?
why is it i build more power than you in every RPM till 6000 where your high HP shows uP?
my vortech is only half spooled at low-mid rpms.
that has nothing to do with lag. You can't graph "lag"
Keep in mind that the midrange rpms is where the engine is the most naturally efficient. Adding 8psi at 4000rpms will yield more of a dramatic tq increase than adding 8 psi at 6600 rpms where the engine isn't as efficient
That's part of the nature of having a turbo on most engines
Last edited by sentry65; 01-10-2007 at 11:05 AM.
01-10-2007, 10:59 AM
#140
Originally Posted by idwin
why dont you guys pm each other instead of thrashing this guys thread?