Turbocharger or Supercharger?

Question

Evidently, this question is cliche and reflects on my ignorance, but I have to ask. I personally prefer turbochargers, as they often offer more power and the concept is more appealing. I am intending to install a FP3065 on my 2001 Eclipse GT (obviously along with an intercooler, wastegate, blow off vavle, etc.). I have noticed; however, that very few car enthusiats actually install turbochargers on V6 engines and I was wondering why? So, my question is should I opt for a tubocharger or supercharger. I would prefer an answer without bias.

Answer 1

Both turbochargers and superchargers have lag, so avoiding lag is not a reason to select one or the other.

First, installing either is a complex and fairly expensive project. In addition to the supercharger/turbocharger and its associated hardware, you will have to get new software (or a chip) to take advantage of the extra intake pressure. You may also have to update the fuel pump, injectors and other components in the fuel injection system. It can be a very complex upgrade.

Of the two, a turbocharger generally usually takes up the least space. It also uses waste energy from the engine instead of sapping power directly from the crankshaft. If you use a small turbo, it can spool up quickly and just about eliminate turbo lag. A smaller turbo will generally create less pressure than a bigger turbo, but that's probably a good thing for an engine that was not really built for a turbo.

If you're going to do this project, I recommend a smaller turbo.

Answer 2

Okay - here's my 2 cents...

Turbo:

Con - they require a lot of plumbing and rerouting of components for installation. They also can be troublesome to maintain and have a tendency to coke up the bearings after awhile. Without at least an Air to Air intercooler the intake temp will be high enough to affect net horsepower gains. The cramped engine compartments of V6 cars make installation a real challenge.

Pro - they are "free" power; no parasitic loss involved.

Super:

Con - they are more expensive, and choosing the wrong kind will make you very unhappy. Since they are belt driven, there is parasitic loss through the belts, pulleys, etc.

Pro - they are easy to install and require a minimum of component woes. There is no wastegate to worry about and no under hood heat buildup issues like the turbos. PSI changes are a simple pulley change away. In some cases you don't even need to intercool. The boost curve builds from idle and doesn't "hit" all at once like a turbo. They run cool, so there are far fewer oiling issues than with a turbo.

Answer 3

I prefer a supercharger. The difference is that a turbo requires pressure build up from exhaust gas before release it's burst of power. (turbo lag) This mean that until the car reaches a pre determined rpm, it gives no boost.
A supercharger however is directly driven by the engine. This means it's constantly delivering power, giving the car much more low end torque, and a smoother acceleration, as opposed to a big kick.
Enthusiasts prefer supercharger for the constant power, if a turbo kicks in whilst a car is cornering hard, it can throw it off the track.

Answer 4

Hello,

For your engine turbo fits better, for the bottom-end power is acceptable, by fitting a turbo you can broaden your torque-range.
(Japanese engines are well balanced, thus you can rev them up, driving your turbo better)

For V engines, superchargers are easy to install and V engines are generally very strong even at idle RPMs, so they can easily supply the torque needs of a supercharger. They don't have high rev-limits, so they don't benefit much from turbos.

Supercharger give better throttle response (no turbo-lag, the time between flooring the pedal and the turbo revving up to produce positive work). Blowers also feel better when cruising slowly in higher gears. In fact they behave like a naturally aspirated engine of a larger displacement, but without the size and weight of one :D

Honestly, despite all of it's flaws, I'm a supercharger-fan ;D

Regards

Answer 5

On a v engine with one turbo, you have to connect the pipes somewhere in the engine compartment. This means an extremely hot pipe running past all the electronics. On a 4cyl, you can tuck it out of the way right off of the manifold.
You can make similar power with either. A turbo uses slightly less engine power to operate(1or 2% for a turbo, 10% on a blower). Turbo lag is not as big a factor as it once was due to fuel injection and roller bearings in the turbo. I think they might even be using ceramic parts in some after market turbos to help them spool up faster..

Answer 6

Depends on the engine. Some benefit more from one than the other. Superchargers get their power from the crankshaft, where as turbos get their power from exhaust pressure. Some engine can handle twin-turbo systems, but there are no engines with more than one supercharger as far as I know.

Answer 7

simply put others put on superchargers due to the instalation. Supercharger gets bolted on top, very simply and straight forward whie a turbo has more componets and to get truly all the power on a v shaped engine you would need twin turbos. the single turbo would only spool from one bank of the engine rather than both

Answer 8

Supercharger

Answer 9

It depends on the type of racing ya do, for drag Twin charging does too good, for circuit racing supercharging will be better, for drift racing twin turbo will do good for ya.
How about Twin charged. You can enjoy both Turbo and Supercharger.

Answer 10

Yes. Supercharger. You don't get the low end, but the power stays in the pedal.