Turbonetics vs. Vortech need your opionions!
I've finally decided to go FI with my low mile 2003 Z. I'm considering a turbonetics turbo kit vs. a Vortech supercharger. I'm looking for longetivity of the engine and will be keeping the boost at 8psi. I'd like to know in your opinions which would be better for me supercharger vs. turbo.
Thanks for your input.
Peter
Thanks for your input.
Peter
i think that's totally a matter of opinion and no one can really answer that for you... i have the vortech kit so im a little biased but honestly if you have the money i would say go for the turbo kit.... i feel there is much better room and ability to upgrade later... at 8 psi boost is boost really it doesnt matter if its gonna be charger or turbo.. its just a matter of what your lookin to do with it.. the vortech is fairly easy to install but you have the possibility of belt slippage so they both have ups and downs i guess
i'm actually looking at both of these kits. i've been searching since yesterday on most threads.
I think i would be happy with the turbonetics with the 5 psi spring. though the issues about everyone rather get the powerlab and the ac lines keep melting sucks.
vortech is nice too . what to do , what to do.
I think i would be happy with the turbonetics with the 5 psi spring. though the issues about everyone rather get the powerlab and the ac lines keep melting sucks.
vortech is nice too . what to do , what to do.
SC kit is reliable and safe on the stock block. i'd suggest u take that route since you have a goal set. belt slippage is not a "real" issue as you may call it, cuz that can be fixed.
read more, do your research, take your time, think twice and decide. whatever amount you'll be spending on a kit, add an extra 50% to it (if not more) for things that might just come outta no where.
good luck
read more, do your research, take your time, think twice and decide. whatever amount you'll be spending on a kit, add an extra 50% to it (if not more) for things that might just come outta no where.
good luck
I got the vortech for a few reasons:
1- I got a killer deal on one
2- reliability
3- safe on stock motor and good for my power goals
4- easy to install
I have a few friends with turbonetics and they have nothing but problems and no AC ever
Do a search theres plenty of info
1- I got a killer deal on one
2- reliability
3- safe on stock motor and good for my power goals
4- easy to install
I have a few friends with turbonetics and they have nothing but problems and no AC ever
Do a search theres plenty of info
Trending Topics
Here it is in a nutshell...
If you're happy with 400~450 whp, vortech...
If you want more or you think you will eventually want more, turbo....
And finally, if you like getting kicked in the pants hard when accelerating, then definitely turbo!
If you're happy with 400~450 whp, vortech...
If you want more or you think you will eventually want more, turbo....
And finally, if you like getting kicked in the pants hard when accelerating, then definitely turbo!
Two different beasts there. The deciding factor for me is the power curve. I like the idea of having substantial power gains through the curve with a turbo. Just check out some dyno charts and see which one typically has the power delivery you'd prefer.
This is great info, and thanks. I've already got a turbocharged Mustang putting out 550whp at the low boost setting. Before that it was Vortech supercharged. I remember the power with the supercharger came on smoothly as the rpm's rose. With the turbo it is a different animal, I can snap the tires loose in gears 1-4, that's why I'm mini-tubbing it now.
It seems that a lot of Z owners are blowing their engines with less than 400whp with a turbo. This is my daily driver and I want the engine to last. I guess I might be willing to trade in that kick in the butt acceleration for reliability. Am I wrong turbo owners?
It seems that a lot of Z owners are blowing their engines with less than 400whp with a turbo. This is my daily driver and I want the engine to last. I guess I might be willing to trade in that kick in the butt acceleration for reliability. Am I wrong turbo owners?
i think the people that are blowing there engines with a turbo at 400 whp either
a. have a bad tune
b. are stupid when driving and are mashing it every second they are driving
c. didnt upgrade things that should have been ( arp headstuds etc)
d. bad install possibly
anyway...since you already have had both types or cars, turbo and supercharger, i think its up to you and the research you do...you can easily have a 400whp Z thats reliable and turbocharged...i think its all about how you treat your car, and the install....
a. have a bad tune
b. are stupid when driving and are mashing it every second they are driving
c. didnt upgrade things that should have been ( arp headstuds etc)
d. bad install possibly
anyway...since you already have had both types or cars, turbo and supercharger, i think its up to you and the research you do...you can easily have a 400whp Z thats reliable and turbocharged...i think its all about how you treat your car, and the install....
I will say the TN kit. When I had mine the car was a blast to drive and the TQ is what made it so much fun. The car pulls hard under accelleration and breaking the tires loose in second is always a good time.
IMO at 8.5lbs of boost the TN kit is as safe as any FI mod can be. Plus, the Raptor BOV was pure sex.
IMO at 8.5lbs of boost the TN kit is as safe as any FI mod can be. Plus, the Raptor BOV was pure sex.
great post, i have the same exact questions.
i'm also doing a lot of reading, but still need to find this info:
w/ sc, are you constantly under boost? therefore would your engine see more pressure and therefore less life? vs the TN turbo, where in low rpms, you might not see the boost. so in low rpm daily driving, you may be getting a longer life.
anyways, great post, look forward to some more answers.
i'm also doing a lot of reading, but still need to find this info:
w/ sc, are you constantly under boost? therefore would your engine see more pressure and therefore less life? vs the TN turbo, where in low rpms, you might not see the boost. so in low rpm daily driving, you may be getting a longer life.
anyways, great post, look forward to some more answers.
great post, i have the same exact questions.
i'm also doing a lot of reading, but still need to find this info:
w/ sc, are you constantly under boost? therefore would your engine see more pressure and therefore less life? vs the TN turbo, where in low rpms, you might not see the boost. so in low rpm daily driving, you may be getting a longer life.
anyways, great post, look forward to some more answers.
i'm also doing a lot of reading, but still need to find this info:
w/ sc, are you constantly under boost? therefore would your engine see more pressure and therefore less life? vs the TN turbo, where in low rpms, you might not see the boost. so in low rpm daily driving, you may be getting a longer life.
anyways, great post, look forward to some more answers.
<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/CTYpVS9l_Ak&hl=en&fs=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/CTYpVS9l_Ak&hl=en&fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>



