supercharger or turbo

[tubby 0]

This question has probably been asked before but why when turbo`s are fitted over superchargers on most cars in preference to the later these days seem least popular when it comes to the vr6. In my humble opinion it has been done to death and it seems to me like a no brainer when making the choice. I have been doing lots of research since i got my vr6 and everywhere i look and everyone i ask seem to prefer turbo even my dad who has been a mechanic for 28 years and doesnt see the point of either recommends i go turbo mainly for reliability and power.So please and without bias can i have a general consensus on which is better?

cheers

virgin

[Earwig 89]

A Turbo is generally more expensive than a Supercharger but "Can" give you more power. Don't forget that Turbo's are very wasteful. They use their power to spin up so you need to create more power than you can use.......

A supercharger is belt driven and as such is not so wasteful.

As far as reliability goes I don't know anyone who has had any trouble with either of them so I doubt there is much in it.

The other problem is the ability to get the power down on the floor.

Unless you have 4WD like a Syncro or something then the extra power that you may be able to get from a Turbo is going to be very hard to put down and make useable. For this reason and the fact that it is cheaper most people opt for the Supercharger.

With a Supercharger an intercooler shrick cams etc... you can create over 300BHP easy but try putting all that into 2 front wheels..........

Mark.

[goonersteve 0]

Very gd question and one that i was thinking of asking......cheers for the response Earwig, look forward to some more opinions :^)

[coullstar 2]

I think the major difference with the s/c and turbo route is that with the turbo you need to lower the compression ratio and in all honesty look at usuing new pistons to get the best out of it. The supercharger seems a plug and play type affair.

The supercharger is a bit wasteful as you need power from the engine to drive the belt, if a turbo is set up right you can almost eliminate the lag.

Unless you are spending huges amounts and planning on fitting a LSD or 4WD s/c is probably best.

[Russ_vr6 12]

its a catch 22 mate

supercharger does drain a lil power from the egine as its belt driven but as u know the advantage is the power is always there,no waiting like with a turbo,and as its been said u gonna need lower comp with a turbo and a decent charger.stage 1 chargers are plug n play mostly and is prob what im gonna go 4

turbo's are good for overall power but u do seem to have to spend more and remember the more boost u run the more lag u get lol,so i would say s/c

it also depends on how much money u gotta play with and condition of ur engine

[IbiVR 0]

The compression issue is irelavant. Thats decided on boost rather than if you have a turbo or sc. The only reason to lower compression is to run higher boost - which you can do easy with a turbo not so easy with sc.

The only thing is it seems a bit of a waste to go turbo and run s/c boost levels, but if your after 300 odd brake then neither will need major engine mods.

If your after more power then you need turbo anyway..

As regards traction - you dont really need 4x4 unless your going over 500bhp. I would defo get a diff in there but as long as you dont drive it like a saxo you'll have no problems.

Tom.

[mk3anni 0]

I own a charged VR, and was lucky enough to go out in the phirms VR6T a week or two ago.

My cars no slouch with 276bhp, but my next VR will probably be turbo'd, the power delivery is insane, the sound is amazing.

Cost=supercharger

power=turbo

[FishWick 21]

I hate any form of lag with a passion. The only turbo'd car I've driven that doesn't have any at all is the BMW 535d. Sequential bi-turbo, 413lb/ft torque, absolutely no lag. Single turbos if not spec'd properly can be laggy.

Superchargers are obviously completely lag free and I wouldn't say a turbo has any real advantage over a supercharger, other than reduced parasitic loads.

Bill Schimmel has extracted well over 400hp from his supercharged VR6s using his short runner intake and intercoolers. The V9 charger can deliver 20psi, or even a Rotrex, which spins up to 100,000rpm and can deliver even more, but there are also bigger vortechs that can go up to 35-40psi.

Turbos also stress the drivetrain more since the boost comes along in a big dollop rather than a more linear delivery that supers give.

On the VR with chargers, you only need to worry about CR when exceeding 10psi. Just keep the charge cool with ICs, short runners and water injection.

Horses for courses. I will always take a super over a turbo as lag just doesn't enter the equation.

[apd 0]

i am VERY happy with a sc set up.the power is predictable and linear.you earns your buck......

do you want ultimate power-turbo.or usable prgressive-sc.300+bhp can be transfered to the tarmac with a decent diff/racelogic set up!as kev says though-a big dollop of power isnt healthy for the drivetrain[turbo] as opossed to a linear sc set up.recon 400bhp is possible on a sc vr with the safety of IC-WI-lower CR.but more power is available from a turbo-but you wuold be throwing more money at it!

just my opinion!