Supercharging vs. Turbocharging
Thread Starter
Junior Member
Joined: Jan 2018
Posts: 14
Likes: 0
From: Santa Ana, CA
Car: 1984 Chevrolet Camaro Sports Coupe
Engine: V6 2.8L
Supercharging vs. Turbocharging
Which is the better/more available of the two systems in the long run and why? Post recommendations*
Joined: Sep 2003
Posts: 25,896
Likes: 430
From: Pittsburgh PA
Car: 89 Iroc-z
Engine: 555 BBC Turbo
Transmission: TH400
Axle/Gears: MWC 9” 3.00
Re: Supercharging vs. Turbocharging
More available? Supercharger kits are more available
Better, imo is turbo. Better power, non parasitic loss, better controllability, softer on internals, more flexibility in design
Better, imo is turbo. Better power, non parasitic loss, better controllability, softer on internals, more flexibility in design
Senior Member
Joined: Jan 2008
Posts: 631
Likes: 7
From: Massachusetts
Car: 86' IROC
Engine: Supercharged 350
Transmission: T56
Axle/Gears: 3.45
Re: Supercharging vs. Turbocharging
I vote supercharger.
-Simple Belt driven & boost is always predictable,
-no punching holes in oil pans and no feed lines,
-less heat than a turbocharger and no exhaust restriction.
-instantly in boost the second you put the pedal down.
-Dont have to worry about how your gonna run a down pipe out to a muffler.
Theres pro's and cons to each system, it just depends which you want to deal with and what your looking for.
-Simple Belt driven & boost is always predictable,
-no punching holes in oil pans and no feed lines,
-less heat than a turbocharger and no exhaust restriction.
-instantly in boost the second you put the pedal down.
-Dont have to worry about how your gonna run a down pipe out to a muffler.
Theres pro's and cons to each system, it just depends which you want to deal with and what your looking for.
Member
Joined: Nov 2016
Posts: 207
Likes: 7
From: Connecticut
Car: 1991 Camaro RS
Engine: Hot 355ci
Transmission: Beefed TH350
Axle/Gears: 4:10
Re: Supercharging vs. Turbocharging
Top fuelers, funnys, altereds etc would run turbos if they were better.
SUPERCHARGER FOR THE WIN.
The instant power is an advantage, don't have to spool it.
No piping going everywhere, more of a compact system other than going up!
can change the pully as to turbos you run a boost controller which is probably a little easier.
they are both pretty damn awesome; but they are both pretty expensive for quality stuff.
SUPERCHARGER FOR THE WIN.
The instant power is an advantage, don't have to spool it.
No piping going everywhere, more of a compact system other than going up!
can change the pully as to turbos you run a boost controller which is probably a little easier.
they are both pretty damn awesome; but they are both pretty expensive for quality stuff.
Joined: Sep 2003
Posts: 25,896
Likes: 430
From: Pittsburgh PA
Car: 89 Iroc-z
Engine: 555 BBC Turbo
Transmission: TH400
Axle/Gears: MWC 9” 3.00
Joined: Jul 2003
Posts: 10,539
Likes: 206
From: NYC / Jersey
Car: 1990 Trans Am GTA
Engine: Turbo 305 w/MS2
Transmission: 700R4
Re: Supercharging vs. Turbocharging
Originally Posted by TakingCharge714
Which is the better/more available of the two systems in the long run and why? Post recommendations*
- Rob
Joined: Sep 2003
Posts: 25,896
Likes: 430
From: Pittsburgh PA
Car: 89 Iroc-z
Engine: 555 BBC Turbo
Transmission: TH400
Axle/Gears: MWC 9” 3.00
Re: Supercharging vs. Turbocharging
Haha
Couple things to consider.
Centrifugal is boost by rpm for the most part. At a certain wot hit it may make a lb or few of boost relatively instantly but it takes rpm to get it going into your target boost. Somewhat similar to a turbo.
A turbo can light off very quickly if done right. Street turbo setups you have to size small for response. Drag race spool is not important as much because you will be using a trans brake and will have it spooled before leaving the line. My friends 98 mm single wont spool on street from a first gear roll lol at track on tbrake it takes 3 seconds to be on launch boost and it runs 1.15 60 ft on a 275 radial. 7.40’s car in 1/4
Twin screws, roots, and whipples are awesome in that they do provide instant power. They feel like much bigger na motors in a sense with responsiveness. But they sit tall and usually cost alot for the hp they provide. A smallish 900$ s480 turbo will make 1000 hp. You’d need a huge whipple to do that and it will be well over 5-6 grand for blower alone
If you can fab and weld pipe, a turbo makes most sense bang for buck. Can mount it anywhere front or back, and it will work. Centrifugal blower kits are great for guys who want bolt in in a weekend. But also dont want to deal with a more crowded engine bay with piping that a turbo has.
They each have there plus side and minus sides. Depends on the goal but i am a fab capable guy so i will turbo everything. I had around 1.8k into a rear turbo kit for my stock 305 car and 600 of that was turbo and oil scavenge pump. And 200 in a old used meth injection kit to keep it cool. Ran off the wiper bottle
Couple things to consider.
Centrifugal is boost by rpm for the most part. At a certain wot hit it may make a lb or few of boost relatively instantly but it takes rpm to get it going into your target boost. Somewhat similar to a turbo.
A turbo can light off very quickly if done right. Street turbo setups you have to size small for response. Drag race spool is not important as much because you will be using a trans brake and will have it spooled before leaving the line. My friends 98 mm single wont spool on street from a first gear roll lol at track on tbrake it takes 3 seconds to be on launch boost and it runs 1.15 60 ft on a 275 radial. 7.40’s car in 1/4
Twin screws, roots, and whipples are awesome in that they do provide instant power. They feel like much bigger na motors in a sense with responsiveness. But they sit tall and usually cost alot for the hp they provide. A smallish 900$ s480 turbo will make 1000 hp. You’d need a huge whipple to do that and it will be well over 5-6 grand for blower alone
If you can fab and weld pipe, a turbo makes most sense bang for buck. Can mount it anywhere front or back, and it will work. Centrifugal blower kits are great for guys who want bolt in in a weekend. But also dont want to deal with a more crowded engine bay with piping that a turbo has.
They each have there plus side and minus sides. Depends on the goal but i am a fab capable guy so i will turbo everything. I had around 1.8k into a rear turbo kit for my stock 305 car and 600 of that was turbo and oil scavenge pump. And 200 in a old used meth injection kit to keep it cool. Ran off the wiper bottle
Trending Topics
Joined: Jul 2003
Posts: 10,539
Likes: 206
From: NYC / Jersey
Car: 1990 Trans Am GTA
Engine: Turbo 305 w/MS2
Transmission: 700R4
Re: Supercharging vs. Turbocharging
Justin and I are a little biased in favor w/turbo's lol...
I'll give superchargers their due. Two seem to come to mind;
Brian's;
... and we can't forget good ole Polly.
... at the end of Polly's run, it sounds like the cameraman was suddenly attacked by a refugee LMAO.
I'll give superchargers their due. Two seem to come to mind;
Brian's;
... and we can't forget good ole Polly.

... at the end of Polly's run, it sounds like the cameraman was suddenly attacked by a refugee LMAO.
Re: Supercharging vs. Turbocharging
alot of it depends on the car. a supercharger is limited to certain locations since it has to be driven off of the balancer. this not only limits the blower location, but also the inlet piping possibilities and what kind of air is being pulled into the blower, sometimes hot air right off the header. also, there is usually a constant fight with belt slip once you get serious with boost, along with crank snout problems and needing double keyways/bbc snout.
Many superchargers do use an oil feed and require an oil drain into the pan, same as turbos. if you just want ~8-10lbs of boost, there is probably a plug and play blower setup you can use. you can bolt it on and be done.
turbos in my mind are mostly just a pain on the hot side piping and putting much more heat into the engine bay than a supercharger. but you can put it in more locations and the head unit itself is cheaper than a comparable supercharger. no belt drive problems and no expensive cog/gear drive setups required. Hot side will be a few hundred more expensive though vs blower. no crank snout issues.
Many superchargers do use an oil feed and require an oil drain into the pan, same as turbos. if you just want ~8-10lbs of boost, there is probably a plug and play blower setup you can use. you can bolt it on and be done.
turbos in my mind are mostly just a pain on the hot side piping and putting much more heat into the engine bay than a supercharger. but you can put it in more locations and the head unit itself is cheaper than a comparable supercharger. no belt drive problems and no expensive cog/gear drive setups required. Hot side will be a few hundred more expensive though vs blower. no crank snout issues.
Joined: Sep 2003
Posts: 25,896
Likes: 430
From: Pittsburgh PA
Car: 89 Iroc-z
Engine: 555 BBC Turbo
Transmission: TH400
Axle/Gears: MWC 9” 3.00
Re: Supercharging vs. Turbocharging
Justin and I are a little biased in favor w/turbo's lol...
I'll give superchargers their due. Two seem to come to mind;
Brian's;
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZFXVZL0DFpY
l]
I'll give superchargers their due. Two seem to come to mind;
Brian's;
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZFXVZL0DFpY
l]
And he went turbo now
Joined: Mar 2011
Posts: 6,287
Likes: 41
From: Northwest Ohio
Car: 1991 Camaro RS
Engine: Lq4 6.0 SBE s485 turbo E85
Transmission: Fsi th400 stage 4. TSI 5500 st
Axle/Gears: Strange S60 4:10s
Re: Supercharging vs. Turbocharging
I've ran both screw s chargers and turbos all on v6s. Turbos for the track hands down. Most efficient power. Easy to spool at a track with a brake or even n20.
imo it all depends on the usage. If you are trying to make the most hp and can weld and fabricate, then a turbo will exceed your expectationsevery time. If you are just looking for a 500-700hp street car and want simplicity, there are alot of supercharger will work for you as well.
imo it all depends on the usage. If you are trying to make the most hp and can weld and fabricate, then a turbo will exceed your expectationsevery time. If you are just looking for a 500-700hp street car and want simplicity, there are alot of supercharger will work for you as well.
Joined: Feb 2001
Posts: 8,494
Likes: 414
From: Sophia, NC
Car: 2016 Camaro SS + 1986 Z28
Re: Supercharging vs. Turbocharging
Sorry for hijacking, but it's pretty relevant to the OP's question:
What about tuning for a street system? I've got a forged bottom end on my 400hp "ish" 383 TPI. With TPI, it would be tough to push it TOO much farther n/a. A little boost would go a long way on my set up.
What about tuning for a street system? I've got a forged bottom end on my 400hp "ish" 383 TPI. With TPI, it would be tough to push it TOO much farther n/a. A little boost would go a long way on my set up.
Joined: Sep 2003
Posts: 25,896
Likes: 430
From: Pittsburgh PA
Car: 89 Iroc-z
Engine: 555 BBC Turbo
Transmission: TH400
Axle/Gears: MWC 9” 3.00
Re: Supercharging vs. Turbocharging
I love either setup centri or turbo for tpi. Boost per rpm on centri’s extends the tpi range. You get a humongous torque curve since tpi produces big torque naturally then the boost comes in.
383 tpi manual trans d1sc car i tuned made something 550 whp and 580 wtq? I cant remember exactly but that was on like 8 psi. Revved to 6000 and was flat up top in power from 4000 to 6000. Thats a long hp curve. It hit 12 psi at 6000 It was a monster
A small t4 single turbo could get those same numbers as well and spool almost instantly when sized right.
Either one would be great
383 tpi manual trans d1sc car i tuned made something 550 whp and 580 wtq? I cant remember exactly but that was on like 8 psi. Revved to 6000 and was flat up top in power from 4000 to 6000. Thats a long hp curve. It hit 12 psi at 6000 It was a monster
A small t4 single turbo could get those same numbers as well and spool almost instantly when sized right.
Either one would be great
Joined: Jul 2003
Posts: 10,539
Likes: 206
From: NYC / Jersey
Car: 1990 Trans Am GTA
Engine: Turbo 305 w/MS2
Transmission: 700R4
Re: Supercharging vs. Turbocharging
Originally Posted by Abubaca
With TPI, it would be tough to push it TOO much farther n/a. A little boost would go a long way on my set up.
Still very tempted though.
- Rob
Joined: Feb 2001
Posts: 8,494
Likes: 414
From: Sophia, NC
Car: 2016 Camaro SS + 1986 Z28
Re: Supercharging vs. Turbocharging
383 tpi manual trans d1sc car i tuned made something 550 whp and 580 wtq? I cant remember exactly but that was on like 8 psi. Revved to 6000 and was flat up top in power from 4000 to 6000. Thats a long hp curve. It hit 12 psi at 6000 It was a monster

That sounds good to me.
Joined: Jul 1999
Posts: 12,102
Likes: 127
From: SALEM, NH
Car: '88 Formula
Engine: LC9
Transmission: 4L60E
Axle/Gears: 3.89 9"
Re: Supercharging vs. Turbocharging
Joined: Jun 2001
Posts: 8,028
Likes: 93
From: DC Metro Area
Car: 87TA 87Form 71Mach1 93FleetWB 04Cum
Re: Supercharging vs. Turbocharging
... and we can't forget good ole Polly. 
... at the end of Polly's run, it sounds like the cameraman was suddenly attacked by a refugee LMAO.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_8ayN7wNxes

... at the end of Polly's run, it sounds like the cameraman was suddenly attacked by a refugee LMAO.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_8ayN7wNxes
The question is a loaded one in so many ways:
- they're both the same thing, a turbocharger is just short for exhaust turbine powered supercharger
- how do you define best?
- what's the application?
- packaging is different for both, is there an advantage there?
- you can literally make more power than most people/chassis can use with either so does it matter?
- in most ways, positive displacement and roots-type supercharger are more different from centrifugal superchargers than turbos are from centrifugal superchargers
I personally own 3 turbocharged vehicles, have owned 5, I've never owned a supercharged one, I've built 6 supercharged vehicles for other people (helped with, machined or welded something with many more), I've raced more different supercharged vehicles a the track then turbo but I've raced the turbocharged ones more times...
What would I pick? The 305 in my TA is getting a turbo... I'm not sure that answers any question besides what would I pick for that car
Joined: Jul 2003
Posts: 10,539
Likes: 206
From: NYC / Jersey
Car: 1990 Trans Am GTA
Engine: Turbo 305 w/MS2
Transmission: 700R4
Re: Supercharging vs. Turbocharging
Originally Posted by 83 Crossfire TA
LOL, the announcer sounds like the Swedish chef from the muppets...

Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
flyboydave
Power Adders
2
Jan 19, 2002 05:06 PM










