Turbo or Super Charged? Pros and Cons of both
Originally Posted by idwin
why dont you guys pm each other instead of thrashing this guys thread?
Originally Posted by dutchboy
That sounds like lag.look it up or read the two posts where I define it and include a link to what "lag" really is
jeez am I a broken record or do people just not read?
Originally Posted by sentry65
your definition of "lag" is incorrect. You're thinking of turbo spool
look it up or read the two posts where I define it and include a link to what "lag" really is
jeez am I a broken record or do people just not read?
look it up or read the two posts where I define it and include a link to what "lag" really is
jeez am I a broken record or do people just not read?
Originally Posted by Fishey
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.
Best post thus far.
Turbo is great for a strait line but you get lag inbetween shifts and if you are cornering. I say if I am at WOT hitting 13psi and take my foot of the gas and my psi drops down to 0psi it will take me about 2 seconds to get back up to my 13psi that I was at (this is called LAG!), where as you are SC you are at your peak psi the moment you hit the gas at WOT.
Originally Posted by priscilla ls1
+1
Best post thus far.
Turbo is great for a strait line but you get lag inbetween shifts and if you are cornering. I say if I am at WOT hitting 13psi and take my foot of the gas and my psi drops down to 0psi it will take me about 2 seconds to get back up to my 13psi that I was at (this is called LAG!), where as you are SC you are at your peak psi the moment you hit the gas at WOT.
Best post thus far.
Turbo is great for a strait line but you get lag inbetween shifts and if you are cornering. I say if I am at WOT hitting 13psi and take my foot of the gas and my psi drops down to 0psi it will take me about 2 seconds to get back up to my 13psi that I was at (this is called LAG!), where as you are SC you are at your peak psi the moment you hit the gas at WOT.
only the exception to that last part would be centrifugal SC's PSI wouldn't be at their peak psi unless you hit the gas at WOT at redline which you don't since that's when you shift
Last edited by sentry65; Jan 10, 2007 at 11:52 AM.
Originally Posted by priscilla ls1
where as you are SC you are at your peak psi the moment you hit the gas at WOT.
Originally Posted by priscilla ls1
+1
Best post thus far.
Turbo is great for a strait line but you get lag inbetween shifts and if you are cornering. I say if I am at WOT hitting 13psi and take my foot of the gas and my psi drops down to 0psi it will take me about 2 seconds to get back up to my 13psi that I was at (this is called LAG!), where as you are SC you are at your peak psi the moment you hit the gas at WOT.
Best post thus far.
Turbo is great for a strait line but you get lag inbetween shifts and if you are cornering. I say if I am at WOT hitting 13psi and take my foot of the gas and my psi drops down to 0psi it will take me about 2 seconds to get back up to my 13psi that I was at (this is called LAG!), where as you are SC you are at your peak psi the moment you hit the gas at WOT.
Last edited by Alberto; Jan 10, 2007 at 11:56 AM.
Thread Starter
Registered User
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 47
Likes: 0
From: at my desk
I'm getting lots of info. Guys keep going 
Question. I thought the purpose of a TT setup was eliminate turbo lag? I thought the lag was only an issue in single turbo setups.
-KunFigur3
Question. I thought the purpose of a TT setup was eliminate turbo lag? I thought the lag was only an issue in single turbo setups.
-KunFigur3
Originally Posted by Alberto
Speak for yourself...and to further clarify a Roots S/C would immediately be full boost after a shift, if its a Vortech like Sentry's and he lands a 1-2 shift at 4500rpm's he'd only be at a weaksauce 4-5psi-hardly full boost.
but don't forget the 3.9 final drive I'm running
otherwise that's just the 1-2 shift. The 2-3, 3-4, and 5-6 shift all progressively put you higher into the rpms compared to the previous shift
so 2-3 shift would be closer to 4900 rpms at the start of 3rd gear
and we all know how long you spend at 4000-5000 rpms anyway once you shift
besides, even a ST will have more tq at 4500 than a TT
....oh that lovely brief bubble of lovely ST torque
that people spend so much time in when going WOT to redline - just teasing man, I know - point taken
Last edited by sentry65; Feb 19, 2007 at 10:40 AM.
Originally Posted by Kf3
I'm getting lots of info. Guys keep going
Question. I thought the purpose of a TT setup was eliminate turbo lag? I thought the lag was only an issue in single turbo setups.
-KunFigur3
Question. I thought the purpose of a TT setup was eliminate turbo lag? I thought the lag was only an issue in single turbo setups.
-KunFigur3
on top of that, they also spool up earlier in the rpm range
usually PSI vs PSI against a ST, the twins usually put out less midrange tq between 3500-4500 rpms than a ST.
Last edited by sentry65; Jan 10, 2007 at 12:20 PM.
Originally Posted by Alberto
Speak for yourself...and to further clarify a Roots S/C would immediately be full boost after a shift, if its a Vortech like Sentry's and he lands a 1-2 shift at 4500rpm's he'd only be at a weaksauce 4-5psi-hardly full boost.
Last edited by priscilla ls1; Jan 10, 2007 at 12:22 PM.
no I have more backpressure at idle than the big turbo setups with huge exhausts and test pipes But yeah just off of Idle I already have some boost coming out of the vortech - not a huge deal though, but it's there. A lot of TT setups can start making some boost as early as 2000 rpms though - possibly even 1800 rpms in some cases.
It's a trade off though. Usually the turbo setups making gigantic numbers with bigger turbos and huge exhausts take longer to spool up the turbos than say a kit like the JWT kit which has tiny turbos
But yeah just off of Idle I already have some boost coming out of the vortech - not a huge deal though, but it's there. A lot of TT setups can start making some boost as early as 2000 rpms though - possibly even 1800 rpms in some cases.It's a trade off though. Usually the turbo setups making gigantic numbers with bigger turbos and huge exhausts take longer to spool up the turbos than say a kit like the JWT kit which has tiny turbos
Last edited by sentry65; Jan 10, 2007 at 12:25 PM.
Originally Posted by sentry65
your definition of "lag" is incorrect. You're thinking of turbo spool
look it up or read the two posts where I define it and include a link to what "lag" really is
jeez am I a broken record or do people just not read?
look it up or read the two posts where I define it and include a link to what "lag" really is
jeez am I a broken record or do people just not read?
Please go run your car so we can see what it will do.
