Welcome to Club Hot Rod!  The premier site for everything to do with Hot Rod, Customs, Low Riders, Rat Rods, and more. 

  •  » Members from all over the US and the world!
  •  » Help from all over the world for your questions
  •  » Build logs for you and all members
  •  » Blogs
  •  » Image Gallery
  •  » Many thousands of members and hundreds of thousands of posts! 

YES! I want to register an account for free right now!  p.s.: For registered members this ad will NOT show

 

Thread: supercharger vs turbocharger
          
   
   

Reply To Thread
Results 1 to 4 of 4
  1. #1
    ebadal's Avatar
    ebadal is offline CHR Member Visit my Photo Gallery
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Location
    Flint
    Car Year, Make, Model: 69 camaro ss
    Posts
    12

    Talking supercharger vs turbocharger

     



    Hey man i say get rid of them both and put an NOS system on it cause you have power when you want it plus it is a tenth of the cost in the long run

  2. #2
    pro70z28's Avatar
    pro70z28 is offline CHR Member Visit my Photo Gallery
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Location
    CC
    Car Year, Make, Model: 70 Camaro Z-28 Now/40 Chevy Back Then
    Posts
    4,306

    Re: supercharger vs turbocharger

     



    Originally posted by ebadal
    Hey man i say get rid of them both and put an NOS system on it cause you have power when you want it plus it is a tenth of the cost in the long run

    LOOK Here.

    http://www.clubhotrod.com/forums/sho...t=supercharger
    "PLAN" your life like you will live to 120.
    "LIVE" your life like you could die tomorrow.

    John 3:16
    >>>>>>

  3. #3
    heheheha's Avatar
    heheheha is offline CHR Member Visit my Photo Gallery
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Location
    dunrobin
    Car Year, Make, Model: 1990 Nissan Maxima
    Posts
    14

    No good when you a) want power ALL the time, b) don't want to refill your bottles after every run, and c) don't want to replace things like rings on a monthly basis. I myself say turbo - no belt friction, and pretty lightweight.

  4. #4
    Swifster's Avatar
    Swifster is offline CHR Member Visit my Photo Gallery
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    Sterling Heights
    Car Year, Make, Model: 1964 Studebaker Commander
    Posts
    440

    Originally posted by heheheha
    No good when you a) want power ALL the time, b) don't want to refill your bottles after every run, and c) don't want to replace things like rings on a monthly basis. I myself say turbo - no belt friction, and pretty lightweight.
    I like a blower because there's no lag. With a turbo you have wait for the turbo to spool up. A supercharger will give more low end torque, and the low end is what's used on the street. Notice GM and Ford have started using Eaton superchargers for a power adder. No turbo's in their lineups at all. What does that tell you.
    ---Tom

    1964 Studebaker Commander
    1964 Studebaker Daytona

Reply To Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
Links monetized by VigLink