Ford Mustang Forum banner

1 - 20 of 26 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,724 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
My friend seems to think the only disadvantage of a turbo compared to a SC is heat and some other small detail. Basically he's saying that turbos are superior, clear and cut. I can't convince him that both have trade-offs. Any advice?

I was saying if turbo was so much better over S/C, why do they still use S/C?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,524 Posts
Turbos are not easy to install on a V8, you need tons of pipes, that reflects on a higher kit and install price.

But turbos are better from a performance standpoint, they have almost zero parasitic drag on the engine.

Let me put it this way, a car with a Turbo and 5 psi, makes more power than a similar car with a SC also running 5 psi. You need engine power to move the SC, and only "free" exhaust gases to move a turbo.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,724 Posts
Discussion Starter #4
Well then I'll walk away with my tail between my legs :sosad:

But before I do. Why is there still a market for SCers? and why doesn't ford put Turbos in the SVTs? Why do most people in here choose SC over turbo when they are looking for serious performance

Im pretty sure turbo is cheaper too. The fact that they still are around i figured that both had tradeoffs and advatanges over each other.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
145 Posts
Tw0 you are not alone i am so happy you made this thread i am at the point were i am just about ready to drop a power adder and now all this turbo stuff came out SOMEONE HELP US!!!! haha i know that all of my buddies that have ricers all run turbo and love it i am really loooking for info!


Ride On!

Johnny B.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,724 Posts
Discussion Starter #6
Johnstone610 said:
Tw0 you are not alone i am so happy you made this thread i am at the point were i am just about ready to drop a power adder and now all this turbo stuff came out SOMEONE HELP US!!!! haha i know that all of my buddies that have ricers all run turbo and love it i am really loooking for info!


Ride On!

Johnny B.

Right on. Wish I woulda known this before I went to my friend and he made me feel like an idiot. I feel like when I hear the woosh of the turbo, i just think Rice and i associate the whine of a super charger with muscle since SVT has been using them for a few years now. So if this was our daily commuter, we drive it in snow, what would every1 recommend, SC or Turbo? I like the fact that KB has a "valet mode" where you can turn it off for snow driving, does any turbos offer a similar feature?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
767 Posts
I know people with turbos and I know people with SCs. All I can say is, when I finally get the $$$, I am going with a turbo setup. Don't let anyone try to tell you that you won't have boost with a turbo until 3500rpm, or talk about turbo lag. Trust me...I have a buddy that has a twin turbo setup on a 91LX and at 2500RPM he has over 500ftlb rwtq. Lag is non existant. Not saying in any way that SCs are junk because they aren't. At least not twin screw SCs. I personally don't care for the centrifug SCs. Takes way too much boost to make the HP and way too many revs to get the boost.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
145 Posts
responding to hawg even if there was turbo lag *which im taking your word that there isnt:)* you dont want to start getting boost when you ar ejust cruzing you want it to kick you in the face when you are WOT. That is my opinion anyway!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,235 Posts
Good subject! At the Las Vegas Motor Speedway, there is a shop called SRK, and they are the turbo experts. They have all the fabrication machines and know-how to build any turbo kit for any car. I was inquiring one day about how much to turbo my Stang, well he was showing me this 90lx 5.0 twin turbo with 14psi, running in the 8s, cost about 7K in parts and fabrication + dyno tune and calibration. He also had a 2001 GMC pickup with 5.3 ltr engine. This engine is based on the LS1, but i think it has a Cast iron block and alum heads. This engine is good cause it is tuned for regualr gas and has lower compression than the LS1. Twin turboed this thing and it made 900HP, but hooking that up to the ground is another story. If i was going to do forced induction, i would use a turbo, plus there are things like turbo timers and boost controlers to make life easier. Turbos are just more a pain to install and tune, but once its up and running, its pretty reliable and more efficient than a supercharger.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
145 Posts
sheesh i wish i lived by you i would pay 7k for a twin turbo setup anyday!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,724 Posts
Discussion Starter #12
Awsome that we can make these kinda numbers, but they seem like they should be track cars only at that point.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
145 Posts
would our stock engine/rearends/trans's even hold 700 hp i dont think i would evre risk that! would deffinately need some strength!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
767 Posts
Johnstone610 said:
responding to hawg even if there was turbo lag *which im taking your word that there isnt:)* you dont want to start getting boost when you ar ejust cruzing you want it to kick you in the face when you are WOT. That is my opinion anyway!
In the vehicle I am talking about, for normal driving you don't even know it is there. But when you want it to be there, it will definitely let you know it is.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,658 Posts
I have been drooling over the STS turbo system since I read an article in Mustang Monthly. A gal had it installed on her 05 and her car was cranking around 470 rwhp.

http://www.ststurbo.com/

no under hood heat issues.

supercharges are cool because there is NO lag time at all. but, as I always say, if you have turbo lag, you aren't driving it right.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
297 Posts
tw0scoops123 said:
Well then I'll walk away with my tail between my legs :sosad:

But before I do. Why is there still a market for SCers? and why doesn't ford put Turbos in the SVTs? Why do most people in here choose SC over turbo when they are looking for serious performance

Im pretty sure turbo is cheaper too. The fact that they still are around i figured that both had tradeoffs and advatanges over each other.
the folks looking for SERIOUS performance go with turbos. Most people here aren't trying to build an +700 something horsepower engine.

Superchargers offer full boost from idle to almost redline, then starts to drop off because of efficiency issues. But it offers that instant gratification that makes them popular for the street, and the self contained lubrication is a plus.
Turbos are just the opposite, you get some boost from idle and then at the upper rpm's the only limitation is how much air and rev's the engine will take. and it shares oil with the engine. Nothing like running your precious oil through a cooker is there?
But they are more efficient.

There used to be production turbo cars everywhere (my mother had a new 79' Mustang turbo) laggy and required more maintence (oil changes) or they WOULD burn up and that kinda gave them a poor reputation. This was WAAY back in the 80's though and most cars were crap anyway:tongue sheesh, am I really almost 40 (cough-cough)

Supercharges are simpler to tune and cheaper to warrenty. If you don't change the oil in your car you will not burn up your SC. I'm thinking this is a big issue for the beancounters at Ford. Plus the real reason Ford quit making turbo cars is that they couldn't sell them. Remember the SVO Mustang?
Apparently they can sell supercharged ones though :eyepoppin

And Brent05 is right about the lag. There is none at 3 grand. :evillol:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
52 Posts
1) Turbos are more expensive.
2) Turbos are more costly to install and tune.
3) Turbos require more space to install.
4) Heat is a consern coming off the Turbos near things like gas lines and anything flamable
5) Turbos are more efficient.
6) All Turbos have some lag, but an engine that produces good low end torque is less likely to show it.
7) Super Chargers are cleaner looking.

So my choice is a Supercharged engine with Turbos. Set the super charger up with a clutch so you can turn it on or off and set the turbos up so that boost is only produced at higher rpm's. The best of both worlds. Stump pulling low end torque and boost at higher rpm for those days when you need 190 mph in the straight aways.

Volvo produces a Marine Diesel called a D-6 that is a 6 liter inline 6 engine that is super charged and turbo intercooled that produces 370 H.P. and can run near wide open throttle as long as you supply fuel to it. This engine produces tons of torque from idle to WOT with no lag.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
269 Posts
What about the whole "Turbo out back by the diff" issue we talked about here awhile back:kooky: . That idea, while definetly outa the box made alot of sense to me. All the heat issue's of a under hood turbo were eliminated, the oil line which ran all the way back to the turbo acted like a very efficent oil cooler, and the air intake for the setup was out back behind the wheel so no need for an intercooler:laughlitt . The only drawback seemed to be that the intake was hanging out where it would get wet in the rain. Someone posted a link to some shop in California that was putting together a kit. At the very least with this setup you would be the first Guido on the block to have one:smoke: .
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
145 Posts
yeah i'd drive down to BASHperformance get a turbo for like 500 HP and a lil blow off valve haha those valves sound wicked

I saw an STS mustang forsale on ebay a while back,looked like the same one they have on their page

for 7G's on that system, thing has to be SICK, twin turbos w/ new intercooler looked like, shittt

kinda cool how they put the turbos in the back since they get so hot
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
93 Posts
Streetable power

The most important question is...What do I use my car for?

Part time use...Full time use. Track days and drags occasionally?

Warm climate all year or 4 season

Do I want strong roll on power or gobs of power at a certain point?

Everyone must ask them selves a series of questions like this.
My car is reliable, easy to drive, and is not twitchy at all.

It rolls on serious power without any nasty bits and was modified for about $6500 including the installation.

2005 Mustang GT.....Vortech '05 HO/IC
480.3 RWHP at 6500 rpm
422.4 RWT at 5250 rpm

I strongly reccommend not getting the intercooler on a daily driver or 4 season car as 100 extra HP should be enough for that application.
 
1 - 20 of 26 Posts
Top