Turbo vs Supercharger
-
- Regular
- Posts: 210
- Joined: Fri May 05, 2006 10:30 am
- Location: VIC
- Contact:
Turbo vs Supercharger
Curious to know the pros and cons of each setup for the Isuzu range of motors....
-
- Moderator
- Posts: 856
- Joined: Tue May 17, 2005 1:57 pm
- Location: Northside of Brisvegas, Queensland
sorry??RIX-GEM wrote:turbos are more prone to detonation than superchargers!
neither turbos nor superchargers detonate. detonation is caused by the wrong air-fuel mixture to an engine. detonation occurs in the compustion chamber.
as for turbos vs supercharger. it would be the same for every car type. turbochargers and superchargers are just different forms of forced induction. do a google search.
plus air tempreture, boost level and ignition timing, it doesnt matter whatr the sorce of boost is.06EMInick wrote:sorry??RIX-GEM wrote:turbos are more prone to detonation than superchargers!
neither turbos nor superchargers detonate. detonation is caused by the wrong air-fuel mixture to an engine. detonation occurs in the compustion chamber.
as for turbos vs supercharger. it would be the same for every car type. turbochargers and superchargers are just different forms of forced induction. do a google search.
Blowers can give an almost instant boost but can tend to drop off as revs climb, are louder and are harder to adjust boost.
Turbos have lag but will give a set boost all through the rev range, they are easier to make boost adjustments but there is extra heat under the bonnet, oil lines to plumb and a custom exhauste system has to be made.
Here nore there really, just comes down to what you want it for, low down grunt with midrange or hige mid and top end.
Thought it was a good idea at the time to beat-box with shaving cream on my face, until it started snowing.
-
- Long Term Member
- Posts: 2115
- Joined: Fri Sep 23, 2005 2:22 pm
- Location: Sunbury (Melbourne) VIC
- Contact:
i dont know much anout the topic but what i have leanded while being on this forum is that superchargers rob hp from the engine cos the engine has to turn it but is always there ready to go, whereas a turbo is spun by exhaust gases but takes time to spool and produce power i couldnt tell you which is better cos i dont know
someone please corect me here cos this could be completely wrong
but i would presume you would need to do more work to your engine with a charger cos the engine has to turn it and the wheels but you could have a turbo setup with less work. is that right
someone please corect me here cos this could be completely wrong
but i would presume you would need to do more work to your engine with a charger cos the engine has to turn it and the wheels but you could have a turbo setup with less work. is that right
-
- Regular
- Posts: 366
- Joined: Fri Jan 06, 2006 11:50 am
- Location: vic east gippsland bogan capital
- Contact:
06EMInick wrote:sorry??RIX-GEM wrote:turbos are more prone to detonation than superchargers!
neither turbos nor superchargers detonate. detonation is caused by the wrong air-fuel mixture to an engine. detonation occurs in the compustion chamber.
as for turbos vs supercharger. it would be the same for every car type. turbochargers and superchargers are just different forms of forced induction. do a google search.
sorry my bad! turbos are more prone to cause detination!!!
Last edited by RIX on Wed May 10, 2006 2:09 pm, edited 1 time in total.
-
- Moderator
- Posts: 856
- Joined: Tue May 17, 2005 1:57 pm
- Location: Northside of Brisvegas, Queensland
stop saying that!!!RIX-GEM wrote:sorry my bad! turbos are more prone to cause detination!!!
like kinsgley said "it doesn't matter what the source of boost is" it depends on the fuel mixture, ignition timing, boost level and air temperature that has more impact on an engine detonating than whether it is turbocharged or supercharged.
-
- Supreme Overlord
- Posts: 9056
- Joined: Sat May 14, 2005 10:32 pm
- Location: Brisnyland, QLD AKA: NISMOgemini
- Contact:
A turbo creates a s*#t load more heat then a supercharger due to the exhaust gasses been used to run the turbine/compressor. I'm sure anyone who knows anything has seen a glowing turbo.
Due to this fact, the air been compressed absorbs more heat and therefore a turbo engine can be more likely to 'ping' then a charged one.
In saying that however, all forced induction will create 'higher' air temps due to the compression of the air.
This is why compression ratios of the engine must be lowered (although new technology is bringing in high comp-forced engines, however the 'oldschool' rule is low-comp) as high cylinder compression as well as boost can raise air temps so high that the a/f mix will ignite without spark (detonation/pinging).
Thats a bit rough, but I think you two were a bit quick to jump on
RIX.
Due to this fact, the air been compressed absorbs more heat and therefore a turbo engine can be more likely to 'ping' then a charged one.
In saying that however, all forced induction will create 'higher' air temps due to the compression of the air.
This is why compression ratios of the engine must be lowered (although new technology is bringing in high comp-forced engines, however the 'oldschool' rule is low-comp) as high cylinder compression as well as boost can raise air temps so high that the a/f mix will ignite without spark (detonation/pinging).
Thats a bit rough, but I think you two were a bit quick to jump on
RIX.
Another Quality Post by Crumz
Fix the roads, not the fines.
Fix the roads, not the fines.
-
- Regular
- Posts: 366
- Joined: Fri Jan 06, 2006 11:50 am
- Location: vic east gippsland bogan capital
- Contact:
thank you crumz. i knew wot i was tryin to say but u said it so much betaCrumz wrote:A turbo creates a s*#t load more heat then a supercharger due to the exhaust gasses been used to run the turbine/compressor. I'm sure anyone who knows anything has seen a glowing turbo.
Due to this fact, the air been compressed absorbs more heat and therefore a turbo engine can be more likely to 'ping' then a charged one.
In saying that however, all forced induction will create 'higher' air temps due to the compression of the air.
This is why compression ratios of the engine must be lowered (although new technology is bringing in high comp-forced engines, however the 'oldschool' rule is low-comp) as high cylinder compression as well as boost can raise air temps so high that the a/f mix will ignite without spark (detonation/pinging).
Thats a bit rough, but I think you two were a bit quick to jump on
RIX.
I agree with crumz that heat can be added to the air from the turbine and yes would add the detonation in the engine but an intercooler can resolve this, so i guess that would cancell out both forms of boosting and leave you with a boost sorce from a cooler in stead of the compresor
Thought it was a good idea at the time to beat-box with shaving cream on my face, until it started snowing.
-
- Regular
- Posts: 210
- Joined: Fri May 05, 2006 10:30 am
- Location: VIC
- Contact:
-
- Regular
- Posts: 366
- Joined: Fri Jan 06, 2006 11:50 am
- Location: vic east gippsland bogan capital
- Contact:
tru and i am sorry!Blue Bullet wrote:Amongst your debating (or in this case "master" debating ) about detonation, I'm still yet to hear what people out there prefer and the PROS and CONS of each setup......
i have found turboed engines to alawys hav problems nothing is eva smooth going (jus what i hav found) u always hav problems and a not that reliable!
jus my experinces!!
Im going to have to disagree with the turbo-producing-heat thing. It is to an extent true however a supercharger produces just as much if not more heat [depending on its design] for a couple of reasons. For starters, the more mechanical components that are "joined" together [eg. a gear to the output shaft on a gearbox] the more power is required to drive them and the more losses are produced. Losses such as heat caused by the friction of the two gears in question. Losses such as power used to overcome the initial friction to get the gears turning. Although the gears should never be in contact with each other and as such there should be no friction, its caused by the oils viscosity [causing resistance to movement] and the oil compressing between the two gears. All of this adds heat and requires power to be overcome.
As an example in a turbocharger [afaik anyway], there are only a few points of "contact" as described above. The only points of contact are bearing shells to turbo shaft. With the introduction of roller bearings, the friction caused by the shaft rotating on the bearings has been dramatically reduced. As a result, not only is response time/lag reduced, but heat as a result of friction between the bearings is reduced compared to a bush bearing turbo.
As another point about heat between the two, a friend of mine had two setups on his R31 skyline - the first being a s/c setupn utilizing an SC14 off a Toyota 1GGZE engine, and the second being a turbo setup ex-VL RB30ET. The microtech computer has a sensor measuring inlet temperatures, and there was a reduction in temp around 25-35deg celcius [dependant on the day!] between the two setups. BOTH were intercooled. The supercharger setup was great, but once heat set in power fell off.
As for what is better, it all depends on what you want out of a car. Are you a Commodore V8 driver, who wants low down torque with instant response? Are you someone that has grown up driving high reving four cylinders and expects power that is higher in the rev range? Or do you want a setup with plenty of potential left in it?
I would go turbo. There is a myriad of aftermarket and OEM parts availible, along with a whole wealth of knowledge to get what you want.
Nick-
As an example in a turbocharger [afaik anyway], there are only a few points of "contact" as described above. The only points of contact are bearing shells to turbo shaft. With the introduction of roller bearings, the friction caused by the shaft rotating on the bearings has been dramatically reduced. As a result, not only is response time/lag reduced, but heat as a result of friction between the bearings is reduced compared to a bush bearing turbo.
As another point about heat between the two, a friend of mine had two setups on his R31 skyline - the first being a s/c setupn utilizing an SC14 off a Toyota 1GGZE engine, and the second being a turbo setup ex-VL RB30ET. The microtech computer has a sensor measuring inlet temperatures, and there was a reduction in temp around 25-35deg celcius [dependant on the day!] between the two setups. BOTH were intercooled. The supercharger setup was great, but once heat set in power fell off.
As for what is better, it all depends on what you want out of a car. Are you a Commodore V8 driver, who wants low down torque with instant response? Are you someone that has grown up driving high reving four cylinders and expects power that is higher in the rev range? Or do you want a setup with plenty of potential left in it?
I would go turbo. There is a myriad of aftermarket and OEM parts availible, along with a whole wealth of knowledge to get what you want.
Nick-
Previously GeminiCoupe/GeminiRollingShell/SCAR3D/Jonnoisac#nt
78 TD Gemini Sedan - R.I.P
81 TE Gemini Sedan
78 TD Gemini Sedan - R.I.P
81 TE Gemini Sedan