Thread: supercharger vs turbocharger
Hybrid View
-
07-17-2004 07:05 PM #1
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
-
07-17-2004 08:02 PM #2
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
>>>>>>
-
07-23-2004 04:11 PM #3
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.
-
07-23-2004 05:15 PM #4
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.---Tom
1964 Studebaker Commander
1964 Studebaker Daytona
I wonder if air could be trapped in there, maybe more run time would purge it out.
New guy from Utah.