Turbo vs. Supercharger - Which is Best?
Which forced induction method is best for YOUR car? Turbo or supercharger? Twin-turbo or a whipple blower? Pulleys, boost and more! Learn about which is better for more power, turbos or superchargers!
#turbo #supercharger #boost
Join The Ideal Fam - bit.ly/IdealMembership
Our best videos aren't out yet! Subscribe so you won't miss a thing!
►Subscribe HERE: bit.ly/IdealCarsKZhead
►Follow us on Facebook! / idealcarsofficial
►Snag An Ideal Shirt Or Slap! bit.ly/IdealMediaShop
►Follow Our Instagram! - bit.ly/IdealCarsInsta
►Join The Ideal Car Strategies - bit.ly/IdealCarStrategies130
Ideal Cars is at the center of shifting the way next generation car enthusiasts buy, drive and enjoy Ideal Cars!
Life's Short. Learn How To Drive Ideal Cars - bit.ly/IdealCarStrategies130
CHECK OUT AND BUY ALL OUR GEAR: www.amazon.com/shop/idealcars
I personally never favor one over the other cause they have their own benefits. Also, they both make beautiful noises. Twincharging gives the engine the best of both & I don't feel as if they cancel out each other in that scenario.
Well said. Canyon carving in a supercharged car is usually preferred over Turbo.
Twincharging is dope, but it takes an extremely durable engine to handle all of that boost. That's why it's extremely rare even in high performance cars.
I'VE ALWAYS HAD REAL GOOD IMAGINATION. I HAD THIS SOLVED THIRTY YEARS AGO.
@@gaming4christ_1 depends on how you do it, like if you're twincharging through a m122 eaton making like 5lbs you don't HAVE to make a crap ton of boost, 15lbs total would be very reasonable, and 5lbs from the eaton would still give you tons of extra kick, I'm gonna be twincharging a built bottom end cobra motor for my car at some point and I'm going for a vmp using an eaton R2650 rotor pack, sitting it for 10-14lbs, with some BSFC testing to see what boost level is most efficient, and then slap some big boi twin 88s that will barely make 2lbs of boost by themselves on the street due to light wastegate springs, for a total of like 16lbs at the most for the street.
I feel like turbocharging is the best for a regular engine's peak power, and efficiency but the roots supercharger never surges on boost, and is best for simplicity, and 4000whp. And one more note. turbochargers take a LOT of power from an engine too, the engine exhaust pressure with a turbo is usually 1-2 times as mush as it's boost pressure. This means that the engine has to work to push out the exhaust, robbing power.
I've had both on my car. When I was supercharged (Vortech V9) I loved the linear power and that I had peak torque from 2500 rpm's to redline. Only draw back with a SC is you dont make your peak hp until redline. I always wanted to put in a bigger SC but the fact it was a 3.2L VR6 I saw others struggle with the engine having a hard time turning the SC and constantly breaking belts so I went turbo (Garrett GT3582R) and never looked back. My wheel hp only increased by 70 from the SC level but my wheel torque increased by 160. I could go with some bigger injectors and a different tune to squeeze some more power out of it but then Id be close to my limits as far as my stock internals and transmission could handle.
My Miata doesn’t make as much torque as the turbo added total 😂😂😂
I think in the case of the vr6, it's right on the line where you could go either way, works well with a turbo, works well with a super. Works well with a Centri, works well with TT. Loved the r32
@@Dragon228833 LOL
I KNOW OF A COUPLE OF DIFFERENT WAYS TO ADD BOOST OTHER THAN SUPER/ TURBO CHARGER.
@@ronniewall1481 tell us then.
Aye, love how you narrated this video man. Was absolutely perfect. All the little side tidbits of information you through in there just 👌🏼
This has always been a big discussion. Thanks for posting this ideal crew 👍😎👍
Why not have water tank on board & make extra oxygen from that & enrich the air going in to give you boost?
@@kevinburke6743 Iced water?
@@kevinburke6743 Because, there's something called nitrous.
I put a charger on a 2.4L VTEC Honda in my civic type r . I used a rotrex supercharger which worked really well with this screamer of an engine. The charge Temps were amazing and with a medium sized charger the engine made 500hp. Id also add that this car was a great daily driver.
Which type? Super Charger or Turbocharger?
@@shadowopsairman1583 supercharger
Depends on the application you’re using it for then you can get a better answer. Both induction systems are great but they also got their downfalls too
I've only had a couple examples, but I had a supercharged old Oldsmobile that was a beast and it was so fun to drive, unless I was a really low on gas and then the whole car didn't want to go lol The Impreza I had with the turbo was a completely different experience and I 100% get why some people like them. I'm in the supercharger camp though since it just went when I hit the gas and instant gratification and all that
Use both supercharger for low end and turbo for hi end power.
Volvo is currently doing it but Volkswagen, Lancia and Nissan have already done so. To make this relatively short, Saab made a successful low pressured turbocharged engine which fattens the low end torque. However soon enough Volvo followed suit and exploited Saab's weakness, relying on bigger displacement such as 3.0T. Nevertheless the Swedes were the first to make proper low inertia turbocharged engines. I was surprised with Volvo's 2.4T (2.4 LPT) - it's a lot faster than you think esp. in many real life situations. It was a treat compared to Volvo's old school high pressured T5 (2.3 HPT). On paper the old year 2K era 2.3L T5 was faster than faster than the 2.4T but not in real life. Volvo's LPT is surprisingly good for low and high revs. Off course now Volvo has been hunting for even fatter low end torque and high eng power so here comes the new "T6" 2.0L inline four Twin-charged.
I feel the instant power is a little under expressed here. To make a turbo system good for a big engine that truly makes sense to use over a supercharger is when you're trying to hit ridiculous horsepower numbers. We're talking about 1500+. For less money, less time, and a better feel, the supercharger always makes sense. Heck SS camaros and GT mustangs have companies still putting out super charger kits for under 6k installed and tuned that can get them 200+ horsepower with no other supporting parts or mods needed, that still get them the instant off the line power most of them are looking for. I think that's such a big selling point for those cars specifically. Very few people look at muscle cars and car about their top speed or even their horsepower rating. It's all about torque and getting off the line baby!
So damn true!! Am a muscle car enthusiast since the age of 9 .. the burn out take off & the tourmaduse amount of tourq this beautiful beasts display is my love & joy "!!TO THIS DAY!!" Lol With that beeing said got couple projecte cars that am working on witch is .. 1997 Toyota tercel with a 4EFTE swap 1993 Toyota mark 2 1jz gte-nonvvti The love of turbo are also in my blood.
Heard of M power performance ??? 😁 Twin turbos 625 HP gaped the supercharged hellcat 707 HP in drag and 1/4 mile, Both stock cars. ..... Now figure it out why car enthusiasts prefer turbos , a hint ( supra, Nissan GTR,)
@@ghostofsparta6579 muscle cars 🤮
"For less money, less time, and a better feel, the supercharger always makes sense." Nope
You sure don't see people putting super chargers on their diesel pickups to get more power though. It's always a turbo charger.
Finally an actual informative video on this debate. I personally love supercharged engines because of linear reliable power but this video is spot on. Theres no technical better option overall because it depends on your engine and what you plan on doing with your car. Is it a daily, drag, auto cross, drift, etc. you can now even do both lol. People are starting to turbo dodge demons. Supercharged and turbocharged, best of both.
E
For me it's the supercharger. Easier maintenance and instant power. Plus, that beautiful whine it makes.
True dat
Anyone asked you ?
@@flexy_bgmi it‘s a comment section boy, what should he write then, if not his opinion?! Should every comment only say „good video“ ?? Grow up kid!
Instant power=wheelspin
For me is the turbo not only do you you get a bonus sound at the end like a phsss or stututu depending if you have a blow off valve or not but you get the replacement for displacement without robbing power but then again why not just get both I mean you could get a beautiful whine from the supercharger but you also get the incredible boost from a turbo but it is pretty Hard because you need a lot of space but then again up to you whether you like superchargers or turbos it’s not up to me it’s up to you
I’m blessed with a 6.2L LSA … so Supercharged all day for me. A relatively simple pulley size change and 18 psi of instant boost means the turbos are always in my rear view mirror.
Nice car
18PSI?! what are you putting to the wheel!!
@@Millirawk 6.2L LSA engine plus a supercharger at 18 pounds... I'd estimate at least 650, and that might be low.
@@JeffOfTheMountains I have boost jealousy 😂
@@JeffOfTheMountains that's a very conservative estimate - that's a ton of boost in a big pretty well built v8. But, on stock internals I wouldn't want to push past ~800ish anyway, start to lose pistons at that level pretty fast
There are ways to overcome turbo lag in dedicated drag usage. One is to use an external force to spool the turbo up at the line til the engine can build the RPM's and exhaust pressure. Another, and one that seems popular currently, is going to a ProCharger. Basically a Turbo but one that is spooled off the crank rather than exhaust. Exhaust is not free since exhaust pressure is robbing horsepower compared to a free flowing exhaust. Its all a game of pros and cons to find the correct balance.
Thank you now I don’t need to say it. Restrictions on exhaust is never good. Currently I’m installing a supercharger on 240z with 350 vortec v3. Came to you tube to learn about boost reference fuel management.
🎯🎯👍
Well explained Trav! Covered the question impartially which I was not expecting TBH. Running a Audi TT RS 5 Cyl 2.5 Ltrs making over 400HP a Turbo does the job to get the AWD 6 Speed Manual to 62MPH in 3.7 Seconds so quick enough to loose my licence fast!
*lose
Amazing video and way of explanation!
awesome cc words timing we feel the impact the attack great work Thank you team
The addage "no replacement for displacement" still applies, even with forced induction... More room, More air that can be forced.... There is a reason you dont see 5000hp 4 bangers...
while I do agree, there are exceptions. Koenigsegg Gemera has a 2 liter inline 3, making 800 bhp on its own (1800 with hybrid system). However, the engine displacement affects the handling, so yes, forced induction isn't the same
There is no replacement for displacement but even a 4 cylinder in something that weighs less than 2000 lbs will make great power to weight ratio if built right that can potentially take on 5k hp and come out on top.
@@TheMrDarius when you start going up over 2500hp the weight doesn't matter nearly as much. 5k hp isn't even viable on the street and would need to be on a prepped track.
@@Inferiis with what fuel does make that power
@@rawful502 as far as I know all Koenigseggs are designed for e100 (aka biofuel). Not sure about the Gemera though, but it runs on anything octanewise
You are good at explaining 🙂
also one difference is that superchargers have very linear power delivery since it runs parralel to your engine revs, while a turbocharger would have to build up and spool the turbo to kick in. i mean with anti-lag you pretty much cut off that delayed response it takes the engine to burn fuel and then get out the exhaust to then spool the engine. Or even sequential turbos that have a smaller turbo for lower RPMS and help the bigger turbo spool up and take over at higher RPMS. They both have their quirks and both sound amazing.
Best video on this topic i've seen
Having both of them on one motor is the best results for low end power and for top end speed
thumbnail needs a separate video
Thx man it helped alot good to know 👍
Misspelled install. Great video I did learn something new!
I think a turbo also robs power from the motor because it's clogging up the exhaust. I still like any forced induction.
A lot less than a supercharger
@@mansikkamies9146 Only way to know for sure is to measure actual fuel usage at same horsepower output on both motors or measure horsepower output at same fuel usage on both engines. All else is just opinion, right?
A turbo eats up like 5hp, wayyyyyy less than a supercharger
Love the information it cleared up a lot of confusion.
thank you for teaching me this🙂 and keep it up
nice video and it seems very logical. thanks
Thank Goodness for turbos my car wouldn't sound the same at all without that whistle 🤷♂️🔥
You referred to Roots or screw superchargers, but no mention at all of the centrifugal type. I understand too many types equals too much time, but a brief mention for comparison would help
My Supercharged Miata would like to have a word with you. Great video btw!
tnx i learned a lot from this vid
After building racing engines of both flavors I can say this: If you want to play on easy mode, just get a blower. If you want every last bit of power as efficiently as possible, and you don't mind extra challenge and complexity, get a turbo (system). Turbos, btw, arn't free either. They create backpressure that the engine has to work against, it's just much more efficient than a belt.
@Gustav No. Exhaust backpressure is pressure in the exhaust system that impedes exhaust flow and works against the pumping action of the pistons. On a turbocharged engine the turbine, the part driven by the exhaust, is usually a restriction, thus creating backpressure. This isn't altogether bad as the boost generated by the compressor, the other side of the turbo, means we can burn much more fuel and make much more power then the restriction the turbine costs us resulting in a large net gain. Engine breaking (in spark ignition engines) is something else. Engine breaking is when you close the throttle and a large vacume is created which the pistons are pulling against which slows the engine which slows the vehicle. If you've ever stuck a suction dart to a piece of glass and noted how hard is can be to pull it straight off that's a tiny fraction of what the engine is experiencing. In a sense it's "reverse horsepower" trying to stop the engine.
@@177SCmaro Re: engine braking; this is mitigated by it's either a bypass or a dump valve (can't recall how it works) on the inlet side which allows the turbine to stay at speed. @6.05 the guy is installing one,pretty sure it's a blow off. That said there's nothing like that 2 stroke effect turbo's have when it hits the powerband like a 2 stroke motorbike
Sucker & blower. The nicknames me and my friend had in school
?
Hold up-
@@thelonelypotato9239 ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
I ran a boat with Detroit diesel 12/71s. They had twin turbos and a supercharger. Loved them.
And no boost... they are for scavenging.
Sublime explanation 👏👏👏👏👏 bravo
At the high end of power, it's an argument - Aircraft piston engines were usually turbocharged, but Top Fuel makes more power and are supercharged. Mostly though it comes down to where you want the power boost - low-end grunt you supercharge, high end power go turbo *especially* if your car already has issues hooking up.
If you are good at systems design, you can get both with turbos, but it requires thought and planning, not just "slap a turbo on'er and call'er done" engine and engine systems building.
Turbo's got banned by top fuel years ago they made the cars too fast😂
@@shyanhansel3264 Then explain why they didn't ban superchargers, that make the cars even faster yet? Explain why they went to 1000 foot dragstrips from the classic 1320 "quarter mile" strips YEARS ago due to excessive speeds? Your claim makes ZERO sense.
Used to be that superchargers would follow power with rpms, but with newer turbo tech it linear power bands are easier to achieve
And now ask turbo charged engines how their life expectancy is doing.
@@DesertStateNevada 190,000 miles on our MazdaSpeed3 and still going strong.
I have a 2018 Trackhawk facing 6 years in May (expensive to maintain without warranty). Love the instant acceleration anytime I hit the pedal! In college I had a Mustang 5.0 and got a new Eclipse GSX turbo when I graduated in 1992, which the turbo lag was apparent, unless I held the break and pedal in a simulated launch without the buttons of today. Now I'm trading my Trackhawk in a Macan GTS (on order, deliver in April) and I've concerned if I'll like it as much (haven't driven a GTS) because of the lag I experienced 30 years ago, but I can't get a new Trackhawk (don't make them any longer)...but this video is awesome at explaining the differences and I love the fact that you reference the Hellcat engine and the launch control of the turbos. While there might be lag when stomping, hopefully I'll have good instant force using the launch on the Macan GTS. You've given me some positivity to look forward to!
Great stuff 👍🏿👍🏿
Nobody tests how much horsepower is lost due to the exhaust restriction of a turbo. Most will show how much changing to a smaller exhaust system but not the turbo.
nail on the head with this one. to compress the same volume of air requires the same amount of power irrespective of how its done. add in compressor efficiency and theres even more power required. quick search, twin screw can reach 92%. say 80% average? havent seen a turbo with a map over...75%? and its pretty hard to keep a turbo in that sweet spot.... that power for the compressor has to come from somewhere. some of its the heat in the gas. in this regard turbos are great... a piston cant use that energy. some of its the pressure of the gas. (which is due to the heat...) takes power to force air OUT of a cylinder at anything above atmospheric... through a restriction... always bear in mind the same amount of air that enters the compressor then passes through the engine and out the turbine. the only thing about it that changes is its temperature. maybe a slight volume change from chemistry, but its mostly from air expanding when hot. burning fuel adds heat. found a video of some guy running a turbocharger turbine engine, as external combustion. just heating the air up with a big heat exchanger. proves the point. engines run on air. and then theres exhaust gas left in the combustion chamber. at 10:1 CR that leaves ~1/10th of the cylinder contents as hot burnt gas. if the pressure is higher than atmospheric at the end of the ex stroke, theres more than 1/10th left as exhaust gas in that clearance volume... and that gas has to re-expand and fall below the manifold pressure before new fresh air can even start moving in. still have to love the sound of turbos :)
For turbos, they should have a pressured air attachment so you could blow a ton of air in them without waiting for the motor to spin them up. And a small air compressor could be attached to the alternator so that air compression can also be available cause you only need it for the initial spin up.
Nitrous is cheaper easier less complicated and weighs less.
Why add another compressor when you can just spin the turbine attached to the compressor faster.
@@jodyjohnstein and will ruin more engines too
@@jodyjohnsteinand burns an engine up
@Rickets1911 yall habe no idea what you're talking about. Nitrous doesn't blow engines up any more than any other power adder when done right. Bad tunes are what pop nitrous engines. Same with turbo/blower cars. I have a friend that has been on the same big block Mopar nitrous motor for like 6 years. He runs mid 8s in the 1/4. In a 3500 lb car no less so every bit of 1000hp
i really like the supercharger whine way over the turbo flutter and hope that one day i can have a big bulky supercharged muscle car
Very good broadcast lots of info👍.
You totally missed some major differences. 1. Turbos tend to have more heating issues because the compressor is coupled to the ehaust turbine 2. Superchargers are flawed when compared to a turbo because they cram air into the engine regardless of the engine load and possibly causing major engine damage. 3. Turbos are usually better for street / strip use because of easily being able to control boost pressures on the fly 4. Superchargers generally kill any chance of fuel economy with a few exceptions, however when turbos are set up correctly they generally increase fuel mileage.
If "correctly" means lowering compression ratio then the economy is DOA.
im running a centrifugal supercharger on my e46 i make around 380~rwhp and honestly its been my favorite supercharger type, it builds boost like a turbo would when you step on it getting very peaky 10.5-11psi, might be the exception you are talking about, my fuel economy inst too bad sitting above 22 highway,i also shortened the gears from 2.93-3.38, i think it was at 25 rated? although i do love a twin screw.
2. This is not true, all superchargers these days have a vacuum or electronic bypass and they are only active under load 3. An electronic bypass can be positioned gradually, much like a throttle body, which gives superchargers "boost control", even though pulley sizes are fixed 4. See point 2, with the bypass active (driving like a grandma), fuel economy with a supercharger is only marginally worse than without; similarly, if one drives a turbo or twin turbo setup in boost, fuel economy will suffer a lot (and having a tiny engine with a turbo to meet EPA fuel economy requirements is counterproductive, because in the real world people will be in boost much more than during the EPA test cycle)
I have a 350z that I’m considering boosting but I’m still on the fence about wether or not I want to turbo charge or supercharge.
Would be unique to hear a supercharged vq
@@__AverageJoe do you think the engine has enough power for a supercharger? I know there’s quite a popular one by vortech
Had a manualtransmition 2004 350z convertible.. back in the day when my engin blowup i swapped it with a much cheaper option cause i was low in budget.. so i went for not other than the 2 uz-fe lol .. it was so much fun to drive the only issue is i couldn't activate the vvti system so the engine was 50 hp lower that its full potential.. overall the V8 sound and feeling was somthing else on such a light car !!
Try a pro charger
With turbos, you can size things so that the torque curve doesn't go HIGHER, but it stays much longer, so you save yourself the budget of driveline upgrades while having to make your engine more suitable to revs.
This is good vid I watch whole thing
Great video!
Depends on what you looking for . I prefer supercharger over turbo .
I like how while he's talking about displacement modifiers and such he shows a picture of THE FIRST naturally aspirated engine to make 1000HP (the ZZ632/1000 produced by GM). I have always leaned more toward turbo but I am a firm believer that there IS NO replacement for displacement, I mean you build a small engine up, it could smoke a standard V8, but you take the time and build it right, a ZZ632 with a reasonable supercharger AND twin turbos, could probably smoke the Hoonicorn or a Tesla Plaid
It's the first over the counter 1,000 hp NA engine. They've had 1,000+ hp NA Pro Stocks for decades.
And btw, no BBC has run 300.4 mph in a standing mile on oem parts, but a little oe block and heads 5.4L in MKII MOTORSPORTS TT GT has.
“ISNTAL”? See? I was paying attention! Thanks for the excellent video!
Clear explanation, like this guy for this Channel
Appreciate the feedback. Trav is the man!
Turbo's are the way of the future. The manufacturer can claim higher power with conservative gas mileage. Most people never press the go pedal enough to get into the power range of turbos.
That would suggest the way of the future is to forget turbos.
No replacement for displacement holds true tho. Comparisng say a twin turbo 3.5 V6 to a 6.2 V8 sure you can squeeze more power out of the V6 that's nearly half the size, but it's apples to oranges. One is FI the other is NA. You would see WAY more power out of the V8 with the same setup if it's apples to apples there is no replacement for displacement that doesn't mean an I4 or a V6 can't seriously crank out some power tho because they can MOVE with enough boost
Its a replacement not a replica. It should be apples to oranges. The whole point is to get big engine power without a bigger engine. Because you can add it to a bigger engine and now make even more power on that engine without upsizing it proves that FI can replace displacement
@@jacobshriver5699 agree to disagree then, I don't think it's an equivalent comparison and shouldn't be considered as such. If you got a stock LS1 and compare it to a rally I4 with forced induction, you think that's a fair comparison?
@@Millirawk yes because the argument is forced induction can replace displacement. So if a boosted inline 4 or boosted v6 can make 1000+ hp without being a v8 then it has replaced displacement
both are good but have pros and cons it really deepened what you need that boots style for
But how do I add boost to my Tesla?
You need more energy on that car. I recommend a triple AAA BATTERY 🔋🔋🔋.
First step would be to LS or Coyote swap it 😁🤣🤣🤣
Turbo
The hybrid turbo in my BMW M140i is amazing. Full power from 1500rpm to the redline.
i love them both
Anyone team twin-charger?
me
anyone team twin turbosupercharge
@@tiamatene2869 twin-charging is still superior using both a turbo and supercharger at the same time the supercharger provides boost at low rpm so no turbo lag and the turbo provides boost at high rpm but single big turbo with a big block is better than twin turbo
My choice is turbo, cuz it has power when I need it and good mileage when I don’t
Definitely a replacement for displacement! Boosted big ci big blocks with twin or big single turbos or screws blowers on methanol!!
Or, you could do what Lancia did with the Delta S4, and install both a supercharger and a turbocharger, with some clever plumbing to bypass whichever of the two was less effective in a particular rev band . . .
Dang it I was planning to make a video on this topic
No ur just saying that because it's a good idea and u dint think of it
@@GYGANIKA I thought of it a year ago but I just don’t have any frikin time to put my plans into work lol
I prefer to use both at once 😁
Twincharge baby
@@ChonkManGTZ hell yeah!
Hey little feedback, the word instal is misspelled in the presentation, at 6:31! But this information is so much appreciated.
I have never owned either. A friend of mine put a turbo on his LS1 GTO. He also had to upgrade drive train to handle the power.
Theres one very important factor you left out. If you want your engine to stay reliable and running for a long time - supercharger. If you want to be more efficient but don't care about reliability - turbocharger.
Idk why, buy supercharger sound more good than turbocharger
Not me who come here because of Sucker and blower 💀
2:39 That flame off the corvette is amazing! 🔥 Edit: added time stamp
Fun fact, that corvettes intake manifold blew, barbequeing the wall
@@ChonkManGTZ 😂 evidence of greatness
In highschool there was a dude with a 4.6 mustang “twin charged” super and turbo! Wild
Superchargers
Relatable.
sixty nine
69
😏😏
@@TheCarKrazeOfficial 😏😏😏
@@GYGANIKA 😏😏😏😏
Fun video! I'll be lynched for saying it, but a car's EGR system is also a displacement modifier.
About to get some twin turbskies for my 5.7 charger with the hellion kit😎
Turbochargers aren’t complicated… if you have a functioning knowledge of mechanics.
Is it just a case of knowing where everything goes like most engines or...?
Not complicated? Oh no? lol I think you're talking about grease monkeys installing "kits" where all the complicated stuff is largely worked out by someone with a functioning ENGINEERING knowledge. Try building up a turbo system from the ground up.
Different strokes for different folks. In the 50’s a supercharger was it.see thunderbird.
the funny thing is a root supercharger actually DOES add Displacement on newer vehichles it gets added in on some engine liter codes. IE the predator gt 500 motor is a 2.6L blower.
there is also a hybrid turbo where the electric motor spins the turbo at low revs or turbolag systems like on WRC Cars...
lets be honest though, superchargers sound way cooler
I LOVE BOTH.
I used to work for a Large Corporation that dealt with the DC 990. What they would do was change the pitch of the blade mechanically. By doing this it was easier & much quicker to get it up to speed. Their bye making it easier to start. There were some other innovations it shared that were Unique to this area where I live. I.E. Zippo, one of the things that were unique to a Zippo Lighter was that it was windproof. It wouldn't blow out. That's what engineers had to do to make the 990 a viable choice for Consumers. They had to make the igniter windproof because it would often blow out. I know the igniter looks nothing like a Zippo, but honestly. Where do you think that engineers Idea might have come from ???🤭
Turbos do consume power to drive. They create additional back-pressure while squeezing the exhaust through the nozzle and turbine sections. It takes less than a supercharger, but turbos still consume power.
I've owned both, love both, all I have to say.
I was running a vortech v-15 off an electric me1616 at 175v 10,500rpm via pulley with great success, no parasitic losses at all. 1900hp centrifugal supercharger.
What would you recommend for Monte Carlo SS. I was looking at a turbo but after seeing the video, I’m not quite sure
I think we can all agree forced induction is simply mint 👌
I have a crown vic p71 2009. what would you recommend for boost. i dont need top speed i need wroom gone.
I don't actually have a car yet nor I have money to buy one neither I live in America 🤣. But I still watch your videos just to increase my knowledge about cars so I won't get scam or got fooled by some one
I prefer turbo for the street. It's the "Ideal" answer. Adding 'chargers is adding displacement. The specs use liters for gradiations, no? In 1972 I ran twin Garrett turbos on a 390 GT 500, my fathers co. installed the turbos at $100 each stating that two were necessary on a V-8 for balance. All I know is the damn thing ran low 9s in the quarter!
an obvious solution would be to have a supercharger for low rpms and a or two turbos for high rpms but at the cost of higher fuel consumption but the power output would be fun if its a v8 or above i would say
Both are different beasts with different use cases 09:30 Goddamm, group B was murder on steroids... I loved it!
I have a discovery 2 that has a 4.0l v8 and need some advice, should I do an LS swap or go with a turbo/super charger, if the turbo/super witch one will be easier for that style of motor?
What do you think about Lancia Delta S4 ? An old group B rally car with supercharged and turbo ?
Very interesting video! Very good explanation for a non-pro... Now it makes sense, the turbo boosted up to 5-6 bars on the 1986 benetton b186, put on just a small inline 4 engine.. producing over 1400 hp! Btw, the Lancia from group B had both turbo and supercharger! (Interesting facts)
I got a mercury milan 2008 and wanted to change the 4 cylinder engine by either getting a turbo or getting an engine swap
@ideal cars is that a turbo Mercedes W124 in the corner 😍❤️
for example the Lotus are equipped with a volumetric compressor, yet they have small engines, especially the Lotus Elise 1.8 220 hp, but being light it is better to have everything immediately instead of having to wait for the turbo to come under pressure, even as a guide the volumetric is less abrupt it is not like the turbo that when it comes under pressure it feels and can lead to breaking down the car when cornering
2:07, nearly left a comment explaining the chemical lunacy lol
That sound @3:30 hits just right 😊
Stutututu