Ford Mustang Forum banner
1 - 20 of 38 Posts

diabolic5.0

· Registered
Joined
·
23 Posts
Reaction score
0
Location
Newark
Discussion starter · #1 ·
Hey everyone,
I am looking for some forced induction, and I have noticed recently that a lot of manufacturers are heading towards turbos for factory engine (2014 gt500 will have a 5.8 turbo) Are turbos a more efficient alternative? It appears that way since many platforms are switching towards turbos... I know that mpg is more efficient with a turbo, but what else is so great about a turbo over a supercharger??

I was thinking about a supercharger but hellion might get my business after all, now only if they offer a warranty, and a better intercooler!
 
the answer tou you question couldnt be a bigger NO.Turbos and superchargers all have their pros and cons. As the trend goes american V8 are usually supercharged but smaller imports are usually turboed. I personally prefer the supercharger. here is an article that should help you understand.
Cost
The cost of supercharger and a turbocharger systems for the same engine are approximately the same, so cost is generally not a factor.

Lag
This is perhaps the biggest advantage that the supercharger enjoys over the tubo. Because a turbocharger is driven by exhaust gasses, the turbocharger's turbine must first spool up before it even begins to turn the compressor's impeller. This results in lag time which is the time needed for the turbine to reach its full throttle from an intermediate rotational speed state. During this lag time, the turbocharger is creating little to no boost, which means little to no power gains during this time. Smaller turbos spool up quicker, which eliminates some of this lag. Turbochargers thus utilize a wastegate, which allows the use of a smaller turbocharger to reduce lag while preventing it from spinning too quickly at high engine speeds. The wastegate is a valve that allows the exhaust to bypass the turbine blades. The wastegate senses boost pressure, and if it gets too high, it could be an indicator that the turbine is spinning too quickly, so the wastegate bypasses some of the exhaust around the turbine blades, allowing the blades to slow down..
A Supercharger, on the other hand, is connected directly to the crank, so there is no "lag". Superchargers are able to produce boost at a very low rpm, especially screw-type and roots type blowers.

Efficiency
This is the turbo's biggest advantage. The turbocharger is generally more economical to operate as it as it is driven primarily by potential energy in the exhaust gasses that would otherwise be lost out the exhaust, whereas a supercharger draws power from the crank, which can be used to turn the wheels. The turbocharger's impeller is also powered only under boost conditions, so there is less parasitic drag while the impeller is not spinning. The turbocharger, however, is not free of inefficiency as it does create additional exhaust backpressure and exhaust flow interruption.

Heat
Because the turbocharger is mounted to the exhaust manifold (which is very hot), turbocharger boost is subject to additional heating via the turbo's hot casing. Because hot air expands (the opposite goal of a turbo or supercharger), an intercooler becomes necessary on almost all turbocharged applications to cool the air charge before it is released into the engine. This increases the complexity of the installation. A centrifugal supercharger on the other hand creates a cooler air discharge, so an intercooler is often not necessary at boost levels below 10psi. That said, some superchargers (especially roots-type superchargers) create hotter discharge temperatures, which also make an intecooler necessary even on fairly low-boost applications.

Surge
Because a turbocharger first spools up before the boost is delivered to the engine, there is a surge of power that is delivered immediately when the wastegate opens (around 3000 rpm). This surge can be damaging to the engine and drivetrain, and can make the vehicle difficult to drive or lose traction.

Back Pressure
Because the supercharger eliminates the need to deal with the exhaust gas interruption created by inserting a turbocharger turbine into the exhaust flow, the supercharger creates no additional exhaust backpressure. The amount of power that is lost by a turbo's turbine reduces it's overall efficiency.

Noise
The turbocharger is generally quiter than the supercharger. Because the turbo's turbine is in the exhaust, the turbo can substantially reduce exhaust noise, making the engine run quieter. Some centrifugal superchargers are known to be noisy and whistley which, annoys some drivers or makes some very happy!

Reliability
In general, superchargers enjoy a substantial reliability advantage over the turbocharger. When a a turbo is shut off (i.e. when the engine is turned off), residual oil inside the turbo's bearings can be baked by stored engine heat. This, combined with the turbo's extremely high rpms (up to 150,000rpm) can cause problems with the turbo's internal bearings and can shorten the life of the turbocharger. In addition, many turbos require aftermarket exhaust manifolds, which are often far less reliable than stock manifolds.

Ease of Installation
Superchargers are substantially easier to install than a turbos because they have far fewer components and simpler devices. Turbos are complex and require manifold and exhaust modifications, intercoolers, extra oil lines, etc. - most of which is not needed with most superchargers. A novice home mechanic can easily install most supercharger systems, while a turbo installation should be left to a turbo expert.

Maximum Power Output
Turbos are known for their unique ability to spin to incredibly high rpms and make outrages peak boost figures (25psi+). While operating a turbocharger at very high levels of boost requires major modifications to the rest of the engine, the turbo is capable of producing more peak power than superchargers.

Tunability
Turbochargers, because they are so complex and rely on exhaust pressure, are notoriously difficult to tune. Superchargers, on the other hand, require few fuel and ignition upgrades and normally require little or no engine tuning.

I disagree with the statement that turbos make more peak horsepower than superchargers because if that was the case the fastest cars in the world would be using superchargers (topfuel dragsters). And also, at the end it says that superchargers usually dont require any tuning, well that just plain wrong. end of story. Tnhey both require tuning and they both can put out insanely high amounts of boost. more than you will ever need. Over all this is a pretty good article
 
what are ya smoking theres no ay Shelby will EVER put a turbo in one of his cars perios he has stated this ove rand over again nada, not happening, better chance of you walkin on water than that happening. he is supercharger n thats it
 
Discussion starter · #4 ·
That is a really good article, thanks for the info... it looks like now maybe a vortech ( I want higher rpm power)... and I am not smoking anything, I was just reading the homepage of all ford mustangs.com. Here take a look at the last two lines....

2015 Ford Mustang Will Be All New to Celebrate 50th Anniversary - Ford Mustang News
No problem buddy. The vortech units are a vey high quality piece that can be considered as reliable or more reliable than a factory part. Im in the middle of my supercharger project and have probably 100s of hours of research time so if you have any other questions about them just PM me instead of creating yet another thread about em.
 
what are ya smoking theres no ay Shelby will EVER put a turbo in one of his cars perios he has stated this ove rand over again nada, not happening, better chance of you walkin on water than that happening. he is supercharger n thats it
The turbo is just a rumor.


Ford has confirmed the 2013 GT500 will have a 5.8 4v V8 with a TVS-2300 supercharger and 600-650hp. The horsepower isn't yet confirmed.

I doubt the 2014 will be any different.

Anyway, that article is somewhat true about being able to make more power then a S/C.

For example, the hellion twin turbo kit is capable for 750-800rwhp with supporting parts, while my 2.3 Whipple will max out at 6-650rwhp on 93 octane fuel. To go any higher, I'll need to swap out the 2.3 with something bigger, a step you can avoid with a turbo.

However, if you're only wanting to make up to 600 or so rwhp, go with the supercharger.
 
It's an average article with the usual one-size-fits-all misinformation. The lag part is comical. Had both supercharger and 2 turbos on my S197. Would not say one FI type is better than the other.
There is no lag if the turbocharger is sized correctly for the application. I started with the 67mm (no lag) and then upgraded to a 76mm (lag with larger mass to spool) but eliminated when racing. Turbos tend to produce more torque (a lot more fun because you get to break more krap) and have zero belt issues..lol. As far as installation and tuning, about the same with both types of FI in my experience.

Pic of my car launching with 76mm. Zero lag
 

Attachments

I think the reason why Top Fuel doesn't use turbos is because no turbo technology can withstand that type of punishment. Plus roots type superchargers are just beast anyway. A modern generation Hemi doesn't even have enough power to drive one of those superchargers.
 
It's an average article with the usual one-size-fits-all misinformation. The lag part is comical. Had both supercharger and 2 turbos on my S197. Would not say one FI type is better than the other.
There is no lag if the turbocharger is sized correctly for the application. I started with the 67mm (no lag) and then upgraded to a 76mm (lag with larger mass to spool) but eliminated when racing. Turbos tend to produce more torque (a lot more fun because you get to break more krap) and have zero belt issues..lol. As far as installation and tuning, about the same with both types of FI in my experience.

Pic of my car launching with 76mm. Zero lag
I agree.

The turbo may not be totally instantaneous, but the lag would not be significant, either. You shouldn't factor "lag" into whether you get a turbo or not. If that's what you want, then get it. The car will be a beast with either.
 
Centrifugal SC vs turbo

How different are turbos from centrifugal superchargers (Procharger; Vortech) in terms of performance and driveability? They seem to share very similar characteristics.
 
I agree a much more robust intercooler is needed for big turbos but that Hellion unit looks very huge. also the tiny air cleaner on the tubro makes me wonder if its enough.

One big benefit of a turbo not mentioned so far is the benefit that increased back pressure has on engine components. yes the turbo will melt pistons with ease but that nice damping effect on the exhaust can save valvetrain and rods from impact loads and driveline vibrations, and its quiet.

Only real issue is heat and the extra weight needed from a huge intercooler. i would put 9:1 pistons in before going with big boost, that way you can really push the boost w/o melting the valves.. and there will be more room for huge camshaft lift.
 
How different are turbos from centrifugal superchargers (Procharger; Vortech) in terms of performance and driveability? They seem to share very similar characteristics.

Yes and no. As far as drivability, probably not a whole lot of difference with variable vein geometry technology, electronic waste gate controls, and smooth operation. Centrifugal superchargers, as far as forced induction goes, is about as safe as it gets. Good for lower boost applications and are relatively "easy" to install because there's not too much to them. They also don't generate a lot of heat unlike a turbo which is basically like having a blow torch under your hood at all times but that comes with the operating speed and the fact that it's driven by the exhaust creating a load of heat soak. Turbochargers are hard to install, have loads of plumbing, and electronic controls (sometimes) but the boost potential from turbocharging is mind boggling. Some diesel sled pulling trucks and tractors huff over 100lbs of boost and create well north of 1800 horsepower with some tri and quad turbo systems...and those are you "every day run of the mill" Dodge Rams with ISB5.9 Cummins and GM HD 6600 Duramaxes. Centrifugal superchargers are still belt driven. But with a supercharger, there will always be a parasitic affect because they are directly driven off of the drive system. You can't escape it. BUT there's nothing more important that good tuning and craftsmanship. I'd rather have a Vortec supercharger that was installed with tank-like reliability and 7lbs of boost than a turbocharger system with 12lbs of boost but installed like a potty trained monkey did it.

General rules: for ever 1lb of boost, you gain 6 - 7% more horsepower under the condition that you do no increaes the induction temperature and your atmospheric conditions are stable. For ever 10 or so degrees F you lower the induction temperature, you increase horsepower .5 - 1% depending on atmospheric pressure and humidity.
 
Hey everyone,
I am looking for some forced induction, and I have noticed recently that a lot of manufacturers are heading towards turbos for factory engine (2014 gt500 will have a 5.8 turbo) Are turbos a more efficient alternative? It appears that way since many platforms are switching towards turbos... I know that mpg is more efficient with a turbo, but what else is so great about a turbo over a supercharger??

I was thinking about a supercharger but hellion might get my business after all, now only if they offer a warranty, and a better intercooler!

you are always going to get conflicting opinions on this. practically here is what i can say from experience

turbos are more efficient...period. with a supercharger there is always going to be more parasitic loss because you are using the crank to power the "forced induction" itself.but unless you are just hell bent on being green, this should not be a factor in decision making in picking one over the other.

personally, i think turbo systems are more expensive. after factoring in all the costs for tune (which i'll get to later), parts, and proper accoutrements, i think at the margin, turbos are generally costlier.

superchargers tend to be easier to tune. and easier to deal with on a daily basis. i think this is one of the reasons you see all the top fuel dragsters utilizing this technology as opposed to turbos. this is also the reason that supercharger manufacturers like roush and edelbrock can offer you drivetrain warrantys after installation but NO turbocharger manufacturer will.

i am a less is better type of person...a supercharged system has fewer parts. which for me means fewer places things can go wrong.

all this said, if i had the $$$ and could afford a turbo'd car, i'd go that route. but, because i am on a budget, i will be going the route of the supercharger (with the associated warranty).

Gary
 
Yes and no. As far as drivability, probably not a whole lot of difference with variable vein geometry technology, electronic waste gate controls, and smooth operation. Centrifugal superchargers, as far as forced induction goes, is about as safe as it gets. Good for lower boost applications and are relatively "easy" to install because there's not too much to them. They also don't generate a lot of heat unlike a turbo which is basically like having a blow torch under your hood at all times but that comes with the operating speed and the fact that it's driven by the exhaust creating a load of heat soak. Turbochargers are hard to install, have loads of plumbing, and electronic controls (sometimes) but the boost potential from turbocharging is mind boggling. Some diesel sled pulling trucks and tractors huff over 100lbs of boost and create well north of 1800 horsepower with some tri and quad turbo systems...and those are you "every day run of the mill" Dodge Rams with ISB5.9 Cummins and GM HD 6600 Duramaxes. Centrifugal superchargers are still belt driven. But with a supercharger, there will always be a parasitic affect because they are directly driven off of the drive system. You can't escape it. BUT there's nothing more important that good tuning and craftsmanship. I'd rather have a Vortec supercharger that was installed with tank-like reliability and 7lbs of boost than a turbocharger system with 12lbs of boost but installed like a potty trained monkey did it.

General rules: for ever 1lb of boost, you gain 6 - 7% more horsepower under the condition that you do no increaes the induction temperature and your atmospheric conditions are stable. For ever 10 or so degrees F you lower the induction temperature, you increase horsepower .5 - 1% depending on atmospheric pressure and humidity.
nsadams87xx that was a very informative post. it actually made me want to skip FI all together and just stick with lightening the car and making a N.A. high rever due to reduced complexity and weight.

Are you leaning toward the turbo as the better system for our mustangs given proper install? there are not a lot of turbos out there for our rides, just the Hellion and i think a lethal performance turbo but sc has so many options... kennie belle / whipple / vortek..etc.
 
Superchargers drag HP from the motor, turbo's don't. You can't run an intercooler with the old style roots type blowers, bad thing. Superchargers can be a bulkier install compared to a turbo, a turbo can be put just about wherever you want it. A turbo gives you the ability to crank the boost up on the fly, superchargers don't. In other words if you barely beat me at 10psi, you are fixing to loose when I crank it to 15 while still sitting in my drivers seat.

I like turbo's, they are very dependable if done properly. Ford likes turbo's, they put them on my wife's SHO and that car kicks butt for a V6. A turbo car will get better gas milage than a supercharged car. My 2.3 is turbo'ed and I wouldn't even think of putting a supercharger on it. And really a Vortec seems to be just a belt driven turbo.
 
A lot of fairly accurate info here, but one thing does need clarification.

Turbos AND superchargers both cost horsepower. This notion that turbos are free and don't sap anything is silly. While a supercharger sucks power from the FEAD (belt drive) system, a turbo does the same by essentially being an exhaust flow restriction. If it weren't restrictive, it wouldn't be able to spool the turbo to the speeds needed to produce boost. That flow restriction increases backpressure by itself, one reason why many serious turbo cars will run no mufflers or resonators at all. They are trying to alleviate the backpressure as much as possible.

Does that mean that turbos are not more efficient? Well, no. They can be better, but that all depends on the overall setups. It's not black and white, like anything else in this world. A well thought out twin screw or centri has the potential to be just as efficient and even more efficient that a poorly configured turbo build. It all depends.
 
Does that mean that turbos are not more efficient? Well, no. They can be better, but that all depends on the overall setups. It's not black and white, like anything else in this world. A well thought out twin screw or centri has the potential to be just as efficient and even more efficient that a poorly configured turbo build. It all depends.
What if they both are well thought out, which is more efficient? Turbo's might cause some backpressure or loss of power but no where near what a belt driven blower will eat up. Blowers respond off the line slightly quicker, on the street and in a mustang that could be a problem.
 
Well we have three options for turbo systems.

The hellion kit, I don't like the turbo placement down low in the bumper, and the piping is a little complex cause they use the stock manifolds and route it back to the front of the engine. The intercooler that the hellion kit uses is a very efficient design with big end tanks and a large cooling area, but it's right behind the crash bar. You could lower the placement of the intercooler but then you would have to cut your stock bumper to make room. There are two different turbos they offer with the kit. The 67mm turbo is the one I would go with. Here are some pics of the turbo piping
http://www.allfordmustangs.com/foru.../2011-mustang-gt-tech/288970-11-mustang-gt-hellion-turbo-kit-md-speed-shop.html. They are about 3/4 down the page

2011 5.0 Mustang Turbo System - 500 - 950+ hp capable


The fastlane kit, thier turbo is where the stock airbox is which is a good placement so that way you don't flood out your engine if it rains and you have to cross 6" of water lol. They use the Borg Warner s400 turbo which is oversized for the 5.0 in my opinion. Keep in mind that this kit uses a turbo with a t-4 turbine flange, so your turbo options are rediculous if you wanted to downsize or upsize. They haven't released the kit as a mass produced kit just yet but if you take your car to houston they will custom install one. Kinda pricey at 9000 but I think it's worth the craftmanship they put into it. The intercooler is kind of a funky design btw. I haven't found any pics of the exhaust piping at all.
2011 Ford Mustang GT 5.0L

Then there is the exile twin turbo kit. They use twin garret gt28-70 ball bearing turbos. These are gonna spool up like nobody's business and they are properly sized for the 5.0. I like the turbo placement because as long as you have a good intake tube location and good seals you don't have to worry about 6" of water flooding your engine out. ( they are mounted on either side of the transmission towards the tailshaft) from the few pictures they have it looks like a very solid setup. Unfourtunately they haven't released it yet. But this is the kit that is getting my money... However much it is. Hopefully the finalized kit has good intake tubes here is a link with a good pic of the underside of the kit

Steam Players - Twin Turbo 2011 Ford Mustang - 5.0 Mustang & Super Fords Magazine

OutPerformance Shop - Exile Turbo Systems Intercooled Twin Turbo Kit for 2011 - up Ford Mustang GT 5.0L V8 MT
 
1 - 20 of 38 Posts