Quote:
|
Originally Posted by waltert
you sure are stirring shit up arent you, jason?
the choice between turbocharging and supercharging really comes down to the application. and probably cost/product availability as well as budget.
positive displacement superchargers are great for applications where you'd like to be able to punch it and go without delay. and I dont think turbos will ever beat their low end torque production, despite how far turbocharging has come regarding spool times.
if you're looking for on track performance only, you'll probably never have problems with a turbo's powerband.
if you're in an old musclecar with a 4 speed transmission, then its going to be harder to hit the best part of the powerband when you downshift, so the broader the power range the better for some applications, not everyone is after fast ETs, they may just want a car thats fun to drive, and a superchager makes it easy to deliver that without running it in the high rpm range.
you cant argue that turbocharging is better in every application.
|
People need not state *shit* as fact when they're clueless... I'll call them on it. At least you finally stated some benefit to the blower vs turbo rather than essentially saying "don't do it". I've heard nothing from the original poster about his intended application. I explained the benefits as I saw them, and included links to prove the feasability and just how asinine some of the other statements were. I'm not here to make friends, but I'd like to help if I can. Saying "no" isn't helping.
Think about this - Tractor trailers and most heavy duty applications use turbos. This is quite a statement of their longevity. Most production cars opt for turbo over blower (supercharging is misleading as turbocharing is a subcategory of supercharging). This again speaks volumes for cost, performance, longevity, etc. In all forms of racing but one, when forced induction is used, the system of choice is a turbo.
I never intended to come across as saying turbos are the best option for all applications. I intended to prove that virtually every statement against them was just plain false.