Not to split hairs here but the post by 12NV indicates his 369 WHP 380 ft/lb TN Z beat the re-tuned 400 WHP Vortec SC by a hair. That means the turbo car made less peak horsepower not equal.

 

it looks to me that his car has a restrictive exhaust if he can't make as much whp as tq
I mean, who's to say someone won't run a turbo on stock exhaust and crank up the boost to make 500 ft tq and 380 whp and claim how 400whp SC's are slower?
all the turbo setups are so different from each other, it's hard to come up with a general one rule fits all

 

I think that it is obvious that the turbo has the advantage because of the midrange power it makes based on how a turbo works. There should be more area under the curve so it should be quicker obviously even with a lower peak horsepower.

People have always talked about using a wastegate on a supercahrger so you could get more midrange but not exceed the max psi at redline that the engine or fuel system can handle. This would be interesting to see what it would do if someone were to put on a pulley for 12-14psi and limit their boost to 8psi max. Obviously there is other drawbacks like heating up the air more then you need but lets not get into that discussion. It would just be interesting to see what a comparison would be between a turbo and SC with a boost relief would be.

 

So you're saying it only had less power because it had a stock exhaust? Now you're just being lame.

Do you know anything about these turbonetics turbos? Due to the turbo sizing alone, the car will make more tq per hp out of pretty much any turbo kit on the market.


Furthermore, you can't just turn up the boost indefinitely and continue to make higher tq #'s without making more power. You'll eventually build too much to make any more power/tq, and probably will break something in the process due to all the trapped in heat from the exhaust gasses.

 

not sure what he meant by when he said "a hair" but it doesn't sound like much to me. I still think the SC would lose by roughly 2 car lenths with equal whp SC and turbo cars.

So if that turbo car had 30 more whp, would that be about 2 car lenths or so?
I think it'd be close to that






the other thing is we can't take that race as some sort of law. Backagain lost by a hair.
What sort of race was it?
From a dig?
from a roll?
Is one of them a better driver?
Can we really say they are truely equal cars with the exact same everything else????

I seriously doubt it and it'd be totally ridiculous to think they would.
The TN car probably doesn't have a cat since this was so long ago, that was the only option how the kit came. And it pretty much has to have a different exhaust because of the ST's single exhaust design. It's totally different than what the vortech car would run. So this is why I think this theoretical "equal everything else" is all BS.
Everyone is going to get parts that work for their particular setup


I think we'd all agree that equal whp SC and turbo are comparable, but ultimately the turbo has the edge with raw straight line power






well, lemme rephrase it, every turbo setup is different.
Should this entire discussion/thread be about "turbo vs vortech" or "TN vs vortech"
????

yeah the TN seems to make more tq than whp generally, but not all turbo kits at all boost levels act that way

 

It has been tried , with an elec boost controller . He said it worked but Im old and cant remember his name . I tried with a manual controller hooked up to my Bypass valve . I had it set around 10psi . I didnt like it and didnt keep it on for more than a few dyno runs .

I cant believe this thread is still going . Some people have to split every dam hair on this ugly threads head trying to equal out the two kits . It still comes out the same . Equal car , equal driver , equal whp......ST wins hands down .
NOTHING LEFT TO SPLIT A HAIR ABOUT !!!!!! lol

 

It may be bench racing, but this thread was bench racing to begin with, so I'm just posting a question out of curiosity. I know the turbo will win, but I was wondering about the difference.

Bench racing is more about talking about what would happen, but there are actual videos out there of these races, so I asked for them to be posted up. Bench racing or not, I find it interesting and fun to read about.

 

I was just reading a thread where someone was talking about Gordon Murray saying the Mclarren F1 would beat out the veyron if it had 740hp due to its better aerodynamics and hp/weight ratio etc

...I'm waiting for someone to call Gordon out as a bench racer
you really can't talk about anything on a forum without people saying it's all ricer math or bench racing.
If it was so simple to setup and do races with anything you can think of at any time, we wouldn't be here talking about it

 

Its easy Sentry, even with LAG, Turbo's beat S/C cars 9/10

/ Thread

 

on a straight anyway

 

Oh and all that useful midrange kick coming out of a turn wont sling shot the turbo past the S/C car given equal drivers? Just give it up man....

 

if "all possible things are equal" () then the midrange tq probably would shoot you out of the end of a corner sooner as long as you're able to keep control of the car which is sometimes a tad harder to judge with turbos since there isn't quite a linear power-to-throttle relationship

besides, with proper/smooth gear shifting and planning, you'd never be at rpms that are much below 4500 anyway

 

STFU! I had no issues when pushing my car HARD around corners for a weekend at Z day Z, and thats with 494-569ft/lb of TQ in the midrange-which is where I kept the revs. Stop playing it up like turbo cars are so hard to drive/control....

 

I don't think they're hard to control, they just take a more sensitive foot

people who don't know what they're doing can easily power oversteer out of a turn or spin the tail around when the surge or tq comes on before they were expecting it

 

You realize you can TUNE a the power curve DOWN, but not UP? That means you can make a turbo's power delivery perfectly linear or keep the midrange spike if you want.

You can't tune a supercharger for anything beyond linear because it's just not capable of it.



I'd be surprised if Sentry has ever even owned or driven a turbo car. This thread has gone retarded, just like all the other SC/Turbo debates that he perpetuates.

 

I've driven turbo cars and I know you can tune out the big tq peak...and some people who do road courses have done exactly that

Yeah the SC is limited to be linear - which is what lots of people seem to want sometimes. If that's what you want, how is that a flaw?

 

Because even with the large rush of torque tuned to not peak so quickly a turbo car will STILL make more torque across the band than a Cent. SC.

 

http://www.youtube.com/v/unRvopGXCgA

Veyron - 2
SLR - 0

 

yeah that's true - more area under the curve etc, but only if you're driving below 4000 rpms or so (if we're still talking about a turbo car with peak tq flattened out)

the vortech isn't going to be capable of doing high psi below 4k rpms while the turbo will after the turbo spools up

still not sure who's going to race below 4000 rpms or maybe they need to learn to downshift?

 

I think when it comes down to Turbo vs SC, it all comes down to your priorities & goals.

As for me, its Vortech hands down. My car will be daily driven, and its the only car I have. I want a reliable car that's great in the street & the track.

TT's or ST"s obviously have the upper hand in overall torque & potential, but not all of us are looking to make our cars a 10 second drag car.

I would be more than happy with 430whp/350wtq & the vortechs progressive linear power curve... and that's all im really looking for unless the power addiction gets to me

Either way, I wouldn't mind having any. Too bad turbo is out of the question... Cali isn't so emmision & mod friendly

.