Turbo vs Supercharger
 

A buddy of mine and I are having this huge disscussion about which would be the better choice on a P5. Anyone with info, expertise, or experience would be greatly appreciated. In my experience I have seen a supercharged 97 Jetta out run a turbo jetta. The superchaged one pulled out quicker and had a more solid run where as the turbo one was a little slower pulling out but then was able to some what catch up. I know turbo lag is an issue with turbos but I also know that all engines react differently to turbo's and superchargers. Which way would you go?

most definitely the turbo....superchargers work well on big displacement,high torque engines,like v6's and v8....on 4 cylinders applications you can get more return on the turbo,as it doesnt suck energy from your engine,but instead works off spent exhaust gas....also turbos are more tunable.....the SC makes for more immediate power and a more linear torque curve,but otherwise is pretty limited in top end power,plus the sc is harder to fit in a limited space,where the SC runs on a pulley..also think of this on a 4-banger especially,since there is lower hp to begin with...the SC may produce 40hp,but lets just say for example that it sucks 15 hp from the engine to run the pulley...you end up with only a 25hp net gain....where the turbo requires no power to run it but exhaust gas,granted there is lag,(which can be lessened with a free flowing exhaust and also if a low boost app a smaller turbo) but can produce a variable amount of hp depending on fuel supply,internals,and a boost controller....most people will tell you that on a 4cyl application a turbo is much more efficient...I know i'm just rambling now so ill quit b4 i get flamed:firehair:

My buddy has a 87 Conquest turbo and he likes to rant on about it. Its cool cause it has turbo but he keeps making it sound like he can beat anything out there. what times can be expected with the turbo P5?

You don't have a choice at the moment. There aren't any supercharger kits available for 3rd gen Proteges. As for which is better, it depends on what you want. One is not better than the other, just different.

turbo's produce more power than a SC, if what you care about is winning drag races then the turbo is for you. But I would like to get a SC for my car. Why you might ask?? well for a lot of reasons. No back pressure on the engine (not saying that a super is better for your engine), smooth powered accel. and torque. I have to say in my exp. the SC's are a lot more streetable. I could care less about drag racing, if that is all you care about sell your car and buy an american hot rod. I want my car to be smooth with lots of power through the entire RPM band. as for the SC's only pumping out 40 hp let's wait to see but it should be more like 80HP and 60 lb/ft. but thats just my opinion.

I have to agree. That was my point. The fact that you dont have to rev up to 3 grand to get power its like you have power all the way through. I took a ride in his conquest and yeah it quick but you have to punch it and then it takes off after the turbo spools up. that bites IMO. I want power all the way through!!!!

The point is, a supercharger or turbo charger can be designed to give you what you want. The turbo is inherently more efficient, because it's driven by lost energy in the exhaust stream. It can also produce more maximum boost since it can spin much faster because it isn't directly connected to the engines' crankshaft. The Roots type supercharger gives a more linear power curve because it's driven directly off the crankshaft. Many people prefer the linear feel of a supercharger for the street, because of the way they drive their car. Or the simplicity of installation due to less plumbing being required. A turbo system can be designed to give power very similar to a supercharger. For example, the Audi 1.8L turbo engine develops peak torque at less than 2000 RPM, and maintains 90% of peak torque past 4500 RPM. There are many different sized superchargers and turbochargers, and they are both effected greatly by the application and tuning, so quoting specific HP and torque numbers is a waste of time. Read up on the properties of both and decide how you like to drive your car, then decide.

I'm with Eric on this one. You definately have to decide what you want out of your car. Which one is going to make more maximum power? A turbo because you can intercool it. The big problem with a roots type blower it that it's very hard to get an intercooler between the blower and the intake ports while allowing for injectors and whatever else needs to go in between. If you want to run high boost, you have to cool the intake. Hot intake air will make your engine detonate a lot sooner and limit power.

Centrifigal blowers can be intercooled, but then you have basically a belt driven turbocharger that is restricted by RPM. Low rpm= low boost. Works okay on an application where the engine already makes torque down low.

If you don't need to boost the hell out of your engine to make you happy, then roots superchargers work great. They work at all RPM's, they take almost no power to run when you are cruising, and don't use much power to make boost in a low boost application. I've been to Eaton's and Magnuson's web sites and you can get supercharger maps there. The smaller Eaton's that work on our cars only use 8-9 HP at 7 psi of boost. They only use 6-7 at 5 psi which would represent about a 45% increase in power across the board. I've talked to someone that had a header on a Probe with the stock cams that put down slightly over 180HP at the wheels at 7 psi. 5 psi will put down about 155-160 at the wheels. That makes for a fun to drive car.

That would be great!!! I want to have between 30-60 more HP to the wheels then what I currently have now. I know that there isny much room for a supercharger so I ma go turbo mainly because there seems to be less hassle in getting it and making it work the way you want it to work.

wow this has been one of the most intresting posts to read
thanx guys, i know a bit but now i feel so much smarter. so now that i'm thinking about it, i wouldnt get the turbo for the same reason i dont want the zex, cause i want more of a constant gain(everytime i step on the pedal ). tho i did read the turbo can be tuned to run at low rpm. MAN i still have alot to learn. i will def. be coming to u guys with questions in the future.
thanx again

dont roast me for being an idiot (comparing the zex to the turbo, i know the difference)

-Jason

I personally like the idea of a Jackson Racing type M42 Eaton based supercharger for our cars also. I drive on the street and want my car to be reliable and easy to tune/troubleshoot. The supercharger would provide enough power gain to be entertaining, with linear throttle response, while being reliable and easy to tune. There is room to do it in our engine bays, but we'd need a custom intake manifold, which is beyond mine and most others capabilities. Maybe someday a company will get around to producing a kit for us.

There's definately room between the engine and the firewall to put one in. The problem is the manifold and drive. Neat thing about supercharging is it pretty much eliminates the need for long or short intake runners. Works just fine on an open plenum that divides into very short runners with mounts for the injectors. You don't have to worry about tuning the runners because the plenum is under pressure. If mine works out (I'm going to make a sheet metal plenum, tack weld it, and then have someone finish TIG weld it) I'll tell you how it works and then you can decide if you want one. If there's enough demand I may have some manifolds sandcast and start making a kit with a rebuilt M62, the drive system, fuel enrichment, a manifold and maybe a throttle body.

That would be great. Most of the supercharger installation wouldn't be that difficult, except for fabrication of the intake manifold. It's along the same lines as those that wanted to turbocharge our cars before anyone knew there were any turbo application exhaust manifolds available. I'm pretty handy with tools, but casting is way out of my league.

If we could only get something like this. This is for the Jetta 2.0 8 valve. I want something like this!!! Its a one piece supercharger and manifold all in one.


http://www.neuspeed.com/pages/suprch...ges/mainsc.jpg

Interest in Mazda from the sport compact performance crowd is relatively recent. It's going to take some time and numbers for larger scale aftermarket performance companies to put R&D money into more expensive upgrades like turbo exhaust manifolds and supercharger intake manifolds.

That's what Jackson does with their supercharger kits. They sand cast a manifold and bolt the blower to it and install it as a unit.

Has anyone thought of asking Corky Bell about building a supercharger kit for the Protege? He's just about finished with the turbo kit so he might consider it.

Does FM have any plans to add on to Corky's turbo kit for the Proteges as they did for the Miatas?

Last night I was at the local BAM checking out the new magazines. Ran across I think it was the latest issue of "Import Racer" and there was a story of some trade show, where Area 51, famous for their Lexus stuff, has a Vortech supercharged P5. There is a picture, but no story. Just a quick blurb.

Sorry I couldn't share more.. maybe Area 51 has something on their website (that is if they have one).

Turbo

Actually, I didn't think the Miller cycle engine and Lysholm supercharger were used together. I thought they were both available seperately in different models of the Millenia?

I know someone that used a Miller cycle camshaft in a V-8 911 Porsche conversion. He used 13:1 compression pistons and ran it on pump gas. It made 525 HP on premium pump gas. The neat thing about the camshafts is they bleed cylinder pressure at low RPM so it allows you to run much higher compression without as much tendency to detonate. Since the compression is higher, the throttle response and engine acceleration is greatly improved. The car only weighed 1950 lbs and would pull 1.45 Gee on the racing tires. Seriously unreal automobile.