Turbo charging vs. Supercharging

[GeorgeSSSS]

Has anyone owned both a turbo charged H2 and a supercharged one? -- -- or driven one of each? A comparison of the two systems responsiveness and other issues would be worth reading.

George SSSS

[GeorgeSSSS]

Has anyone owned both a turbo charged H2 and a supercharged one? -- -- or driven one of each? A comparison of the two systems responsiveness and other issues would be worth reading.

George SSSS

[Induction Concepts]

A comparison between a roots or twin-screw type (Whipple, Kenne Bell, Magnacharger, etc.) supercharger and a turbo version will be very similar in their power and torque curves. They will both make nice torque down low. This type of supercharger will probably make torque just a little bit earlier than the turbo version, but honestly, boost below 2500-3000rpms is not really needed on the street anyway. 2500-3000rpms is about the perfect rpm point for torque to come in.

The main difference will be that these types of superchargers are limited in the maximum amount of power they can make, usually in the 600hp range. We normally deal with the 600-2000hp range, so where they quit, we're just getting started.

That and the fact that all superchargers have parasitic losses, this can range from 75hp to 350+hp depending on how big the supercharger is. What this means is that whether you are in boost or not, you are always burning the gas to turn the supercharger, then, on the other side is the fact that if it wasn't for that parasitic loss, that would be an extra 75 or whatever hp that you could be putting to the ground instead of wasted spinning the supercharger. For instance, on a turbo system that makes 500hp, you will get say 400hp at the tires. On a supercharger system that makes 500hp, you would only put 325 to the tires.

With turbos, you don't have any parasitic losses, so it doesn't cost power to make power, which means better gas mileage as you only burn more gas when you have your foot in it, otherwise it will get the same mileage as stock. Also, all the power the turbos make will go to the tires, none wasted on parasitic losses. There is less strain on the engine with turbos because there is not parasitic losses.

Something else to think about is that superchargers create extra strain on the crankshaft from belt tension. The crankshaft isn't designed for all this extra lateral force from a supercharger belt. Normal accessories (A/C, alternator, power steering, etc.) don't require maximum tension. Supercharger belts have to be very tight to keep from slipping and tossing them off. It also causes pre-mature wear on the front main bearing for this same reason (side loadig the crankshaft snout).

But superchargers are relatively inexpensive and less complex. If you are looking for only a 500hp (or less) solution, then its probably the way to go. If you want more power than that, then turbos are the answer.

Centrifugal superchargers (Paxton, Vortech, ATI/Procharger, etc.) are another animal completely. They don't make maximum power until redline as they are rpm driven, so you have to really push the motor to make power, which is much harder on the engine. They don't make much power down low at all. I wouldn't recommend this type for a street car, a roots or twin-screw is a better choice.

If there was a better way to make power than with turbos, that's what I'd be doing.

Hope this helps.

[KenP]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Induction Concepts:
A comparison between a roots or twin-screw type (Whipple, Kenne Bell, Magnacharger, etc.) supercharger and a turbo version will be very similar in their power and torque curves. They will both make nice torque down low. This type of supercharger will probably make torque just a little bit earlier than the turbo version, but honestly, boost below 2500-3000rpms is not really needed on the street anyway. 2500-3000rpms is about the perfect rpm point for torque to come in.

The main difference will be that these types of superchargers are limited in the maximum amount of power they can make, usually in the 600hp range. We normally deal with the 600-2000hp range, so where they quit, we're just getting started.

That and the fact that all superchargers have parasitic losses, this can range from 75hp to 350+hp depending on how big the supercharger is. What this means is that whether you are in boost or not, you are always burning the gas to turn the supercharger, then, on the other side is the fact that if it wasn't for that parasitic loss, that would be an extra 75 or whatever hp that you could be putting to the ground instead of wasted spinning the supercharger. For instance, on a turbo system that makes 500hp, you will get say 400hp at the tires. On a supercharger system that makes 500hp, you would only put 325 to the tires.

With turbos, you don't have any parasitic losses, so it doesn't cost power to make power, which means better gas mileage as you only burn more gas when you have your foot in it, otherwise it will get the same mileage as stock. Also, all the power the turbos make will go to the tires, none wasted on parasitic losses. There is less strain on the engine with turbos because there is not parasitic losses.

Something else to think about is that superchargers create extra strain on the crankshaft from belt tension. The crankshaft isn't designed for all this extra lateral force from a supercharger belt. Normal accessories (A/C, alternator, power steering, etc.) don't require maximum tension. Supercharger belts have to be very tight to keep from slipping and tossing them off. It also causes pre-mature wear on the front main bearing for this same reason (side loadig the crankshaft snout).

But superchargers are relatively inexpensive and less complex. If you are looking for only a 500hp (or less) solution, then its probably the way to go. If you want more power than that, then turbos are the answer.

Centrifugal superchargers (Paxton, Vortech, ATI/Procharger, etc.) are another animal completely. They don't make maximum power until redline as they are rpm driven, so you have to really push the motor to make power, which is much harder on the engine. They don't make much power down low at all. I wouldn't recommend this type for a street car, a roots or twin-screw is a better choice.

If there was a better way to make power than with turbos, that's what I'd be doing.

Hope this helps. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>I think it's clear from a prior thread that I, and others, have issues with Induction Concepts.
http://elcova.com/groupee/forums/a/tpc/f/6706011751/m/802104...741045701#5741045701

With that said, I also want to point out that his post above is pretty darn accurate. One of these days, when I get a new H2, I will probably go with a TT set up.

George, cost is a big issue. The SC can be purchased, installed and warranted by your dealer for under 6k in many instances. I have not seen any single turbo setup for that price WITH a warranty.

[Induction Concepts]

What exact issues did you actually have Ken?

I mean besides the fact that I've always been a car guy and built personal cars before I ever started this company?

That thread still amazes me to this day because I had never been flamed online...simply because I have never done anything to be flamed for (still haven't). I asked the owners permission here, before I ever made that post which is a lot more than most will do.

[PARAGON]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Induction Concepts:
A comparison between a roots or twin-screw type (Whipple, Kenne Bell, Magnacharger, etc.) supercharger and a turbo version will be very similar in their power and torque curves. They will both make nice torque down low. This type of supercharger will probably make torque just a little bit earlier than the turbo version, but honestly, boost below 2500-3000rpms is not really needed on the street anyway. 2500-3000rpms is about the perfect rpm point for torque to come in. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>While I agree with the accuracy comment from Ken, it still amazes me that you haven't quite learned from it. The H2 is not like any of the other vehicles that people are wanting to boost. It's that "street" idea that some just don't agree with.

Many owners want torque sooner and are adding SCs to get the torque. That's why the twin-screw is so appealing and why it's the most that's installed. If someone could apply the VG turbo technology and get it electronically controlled and tuneable, that's when turbo will be the best option for most H2 owners I know.

[KenP]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Induction Concepts:
What exact issues did you actually have Ken?

I mean besides the fact that I've always been a car guy and built personal cars before I ever started this company?

That thread still amazes me to this day because I had never been flamed online...simply because I have never done anything to be flamed for (still haven't). I asked the owners permission here, before I ever made that post which is a lot more than most will do. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>From your original post dated 2/22/05:<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content"> Hello, my name is Rad Craig and I own Induction Concepts. If this post is not allwed, I apologize. Let me know and I'll remove it. I'm not selling anything, just looking for some info/feedback.
</div></BLOCKQUOTE>Maybe you did ask permission. Only Jason would know for sure, but why make the prior statement if you did?

My issues, and other's, are clearly stated in the quoted thread above. Just read it again and I'm sure your memory will come back.

[Fastest H-Town Realtor]

Ok..I give up...wtf is so important about IC's previous thread? The info given here is accutare and informative. Unlike the two given by you here Ken. I re-read Georges original post and I see nothing about "Anyone have infomation on IC's last post".

FWIW, i would like to add a little to IC's explanation. Whereas the s/c kits are usually a turn key op using a "fixed size" system, a turbo has to be evaluated by the design, efficiency and reguard the turbo placement/size/boost map/intercooler/routing. Although the jury is still out on the rear placed turbo kits, a well designed kit will be more beneficial than the roots/centrifical/lycolm/ supercharger kit.

Either way, avoid at all costs any non-intercooled kit. And in my opinion the boxed tune sent with any kit should be the "Drive to the tuners shop" tune. Have your local hi-po tuner redo the tune on a dyno with a wideband o2 sensor for a/f ratio monitoring and adjustment.

Having worked on and driven both types of induction in like type vehicles (not H2) I believe that a turbo kit is the way to go and where im putting my cash. But, we are not talking about any major difference in performance because the 6.0L engine can only take so much boost/HP before the block becomes a sieve.

***NEWSFLASH** Some one posted 2 Whipples for sale at a kick ass price. This alone could turn the deciding factor to the blower kits.

[PARAGON]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Fastest H-Town Realtor:
Ok..I give up...wtf is so important about IC's previous thread? The info given here is accutare and informative. Unlike the two given by you here Ken. I re-read Georges original post and I see nothing about "Anyone have infomation on IC's last post". </div></BLOCKQUOTE>Read the thread instead of being a dick.<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by KenP:
George, cost is a big issue. The SC can be purchased, installed and warranted by your dealer for under 6k in many instances. I have not seen any single turbo setup for that price WITH a warranty.
</div></BLOCKQUOTE>I believe this is were Ken said something relevant.

For you to suggest that the two induction systems compare in performance is wrong. The Magna owners here all say they feel the extra torque early, not just beginning above the 2500 RPM range. That is the difference between boosting a truck and boosting a car.

[Fastest H-Town Realtor]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Read the thread instead of being a dick. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I read the entire thread...so,again...wtf does it have to do with the info given here and now? The info is accurate and relevant to the questions asked. Is this going to be a pattern for the next however many years?

"Your info is irrelevant because of that post back from 2004".

As far as me being a dick, you can kiss my ass till you grow a dick. Dont like my post? Dont read em..

[KenP]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Fastest H-Town Realtor :
Ok..I give up...wtf is so important about IC's previous thread? The info given here is accutare and informative. Unlike the two given by you here Ken. I re-read Georges original post and I see nothing about "Anyone have infomation on IC's last post". </div></BLOCKQUOTE>You must not read very well or you have ADD because you didn't get through it. Read the previous thread, numb-nuts, and you'll realize this guy is a "car-guy". Many "car-guys" say they can build, so what. Hell, I'm a "car-guy". Give me some cash and I'll make you go fast.

Actually, take the time to READ the links I provided in the thread and you'll gleen more info. This "car-guy", engine mod master - no "not a builder because I can't figure out compression", asked elementary questions for a person accepting thousands of dollars to mod an engine. READ the links I provided.

Dude, all you have to do is read the links. I saved you so much research time by providing quotes.

You also questioned my last two posts as not being accurate and informative. Well a$$ hole, you're wrong and need your meds to keep up. I posted the following:<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content"> With that said, I also want to point out that his post above is pretty darn accurate. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>Is that wrong? Because, if so, his statement is false! do you understand that?<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content"> George, cost is a big issue. The SC can be purchased, installed and warranted by your dealer for under 6k in many instances. I have not seen any single turbo setup for that price WITH a warranty. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>Well, we all know that's correct. Surely you don't want to try and disprove that. Do you big boy? Well...

On to my second post in this thread I quoted RC as saying:<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content"> I asked the owners permission here, before I ever made that post which is a lot more than most will do. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>Then I pointed out he actually said:<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content"> Hello, my name is Rad Craig and I own Induction Concepts. If this post is not allwed, I apologize. Let me know and I'll remove it. I'm not selling anything, just looking for some info/feedback. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>Not quite the same is it?

By posting the prior link and quickly moving on, even offering a compliment, I tried to save him some embarrassment. You prolonged it. Be proud of yourself. I'm sure he is. Now many of us are going to be watching for his posts and responding with quotes from his elementary questions on the LS1 forums and such.... Good job boy. Good job.

[Induction Concepts]

Your whole point is based off of some questions I asked years ago. I was trying to learn the strengths and weaknesses of that particular application, something I do for any new application I am considering for prototype development. Its called homework/research. I didn't lie about it. I don't know everything, I have never claimed to. Unfortunately we aren't all born with infinite wisdom, we must learn, which is what I was doing.

Its not like I was a dairy farmer and one day, out of the blue, decided to build turbo systems. I experienced the whole process first hand, as a customer. I have loved hot rods since I could walk, they are truly my favorite thing. I had tried about every other means of hot rodding except turbos and I wanted to try it, so I did my research and saw all the problems that people had trying to get turbo systems for their cars, horrible quality, poor designs, little or no customer service, not returning or answering phone calls, or if you do get them to talk to you on the phone, act like they have better things to do than to piss with you and rush to get you off the phone, instead of taking the time to make sure all of your questions are answered, days or weeks before responding to emails (if at all), getting your parts and finding out that half the parts don't fit, the other half are missing, etc. So I bought a used Incon kit because they made the best kits at the time and I was knew I would be getting a complete system. Incon is the company that actually designed the turbo systems for Lingenfelter. Same cast iron manifolds and downpipes, low mounted, on each side of the oil pan. I saw how it was designed, how difficult it was to install (and do regular maintenance on) and lots of things I would change if I did it myself. I got it installed and started driving it and fell in love. It was the greatest thing in hot rodding I had ever experienced, by far. I knew I'd never want another car or truck without turbos.

It was at this point, after experiencing all of this that I started thinking that I could do a better job. Sure, I'd have to learn a lot, it would be a hot, tough job, definitely not an 'office job', but I knew how my way around a hot rod, I wasn't afraid of hard work, and I knew how to take care of a customer...so the journey began. We all have to start somewhere. I grew up in a small town, where your word and your name actually meant something. I bring that sense of pride and honor to work every day, something that is sorely lacking in the automotive aftermarket as a whole. I have been a customer (and still am), so I know exactly what they are going through when trying to find information about a turbo system. It can seem very complicated, daunting and probably even a little scary for some. But I take the time to answer all of their questions, with detailed explanations like the posts I have made here. I have spent literally hours at a time on the phone with a customer answering questions. I was on the phone for 45 minutes today with a soldier calling from Iraq.

Every engine family is different, some have forged cranks, but crappy powdered metal rods and cast pistons, but you don't know until you research and find out. They all have different compression ratios. I have to find out what that is before I can determine how much boost can be run on pump gas, or if lower compression pistons must be installed first. But with the power levels we make, all of our customers have fully forged engines to start with anyway.

Some engines have great heads and really fight against detonation, which means you can safely run a little more boost on pump gas. Some engine designs are prone to lifting head gaskets (like the GM Gen III (LS) family). So we have to figure out how to prevent those problems or any others we discover. We talk to other hot rodders, engine builders and tuners.

I am not an engine builder. Sure, I've built a few and never lost one, but that's not what I do on a daily basis. I design and fabricate twin turbo systems and a few other items. So I always send our customers elsewhere to get their engines built. For my personal car, if I'm going to run 1500hp in a street car that will actually see real daily driven miles, I would want it done by a pro, someone who does it every day, knows all the tricks and nuances and is the best at it...I want the same thing for my customers. Let each person focus on what they are good at.

Every auto manufacturer has different types of fuel systems with their own strong and weak points, some are returnless, some are return-style. Some have to be scrapped and replaced with a full return-style at a relatively low hp range, others are good with only pump and injector upgrades to 700hp, but you have to know which is which.

Every auto manufacturers engine management system is different. Some are highly advanced and very flexible for tuning (Ford EECs). Some are very rigid and don't have the flexibility to be programmed correctly for aftermarket modifications (Mopar). Sure, you may be able to modify them, but not in a proper fashion that provides stock driveability (no stalling, hunting idle, missing, bogging, flooding, backfires, etc.) with major hp increases. The GM units fall somewhere in between.

These are all things I have to learn and know so I can accurately design our systems and help customers. I research each new application and start with a clean sheet of paper. If I'm asked a question that I don't know, I would never guess at the answer and let a customer risk his engine/car/money. I would just tell them right up front that I didn't know, but I would find out, and I do. No one can know everything. The key is to know where to go to find the information when you need it.

That's what forums like this are supposed to be for, sharing information, learning, making friends, not flaming every new person that comes on, because they are a default leg-humper (I believe that was your term).

I have been on the net a long time, almost 15 years now, and I have never gotten the rash of crap that I have gotten here. It completely floored me and all over what? Trying to learn new applications? Thats a real crime. Have I been building turbo systems for 20 years? No. Have I done other things in life besides hot rods? Sure.

So I got flamed because I was doing research, 3 years ago. Sure it may have seemed like basic information to you, it seems like basic information to me too, now, but at that point I was doing my homework. I'm not some guy with a MIG welder in his garage, hacking crap together. We are a legitimate company with legitimate products. If you do any research on "Induction Concepts", you will find nothing but praise. All you have to do is look at the pictures of our work and you can see the quality and attention to detail. But of course none of that will show up here. Its not as much fun as flaming and wreaking havoc.

We don't throw stuff together, we are EXTREMELY picky and only use the finest parts and materials available, no short cuts, no compromises. We won't just build a system and then toss it out on the public to start making sales $$$$, we will continue to work on it, revise it, redesign it from scratch when needed, until its perfect. I design this stuff like it was for my personal vehicle and I'm picky. If something comes out of my shop, its something I'm truly proud to have my name on. You won't find a higher quality product anywhere. We use stainless steel for everything, not just the hot side, but also all of the charged air and coolant lines, heat shields and even our bracketry is stainless. We don't do this because we have to, in order to keep up with our competitors (like they do us), we do it because we feel it is the minimum quality standard. No one used stainless when we started, now, more and more every day are switching.

I didn't make the original post in this thread, trying to hock my wares, I was trying to help and educate another enthusiast. I even recommended a supercharger for a specific solution. I didn't come on and say that turbos are the greatest, and everything else sucks, because its not true. Each has its own strong points and weak points. When a customer calls me or emails me and they are only looking for a 400-500hp solution, I will refer them to a supercharger dealer/manufacturer or even one of my competitors in the turbo industry because we don't focus on that power range. It's not an economical choice for them to choose our products for what we consider that low of a power level. Of course if they are building a show vehicle or just really want "twin turbos", we will help them, but we put their best interests first, instead of our financial interests. I know we lose sales because of this philosopy, but we don't lose any sleep at night because we know we have done the right thing.

As for having permission to post here, here is the reply from Jason (this sites owner) when I asked him:

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">
Rad,

Thanks for your emails. I do apologize it has taken some time for me to
reply back to you.

I had the chance to check out your site, it looks like very impressive work.
</div></BLOCKQUOTE>

and

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">

I operate a couple of the H2 forums:

http://www.elcova.com/h2
and
http://www.h2club.org

I see your point regarding just looking for interest and I am fine with you
posting, assuming you do not abuse it. You will likely have the most
success here:

http://www.elcova.com/groupee/forums

Good luck and let me know if you need anything else.

Regards,
Jason Rosoff
http://www.h2source.com
</div></BLOCKQUOTE>

It was worded that way, the part about 'apologizing if it was not allowed' because I had made another post on another site and cut-n-pasted the text to keep from having to rewrite "War and Peace", which is the norm for my posts. I had tried for a couple of weeks to reach the other sites owner (multiple emails, PMs, etc.) but never could get a response...but I did try. So I went ahead and apologized first, in case it was a problem and would have quickly deleted the post if they wanted. So I forgot to delete that line from the post here. Sorry.

Like I said, I've been on the net a long time, in fact I owned an ISP a little over 10 years ago. I'm a good netizen. I participate, ask questions, answer questions, learn, educate and have fun, not just point fingers or try to stir up trouble. Life is too short to waste time on negative stuff like that.

Anyway, sorry to the original poster that his thread got hijacked, I at least hope you got some good information out of it. I think you did get your questions answered. Superchargers are the most popular because they are cheaper and because there are more applications for them, more kits, mainly because they are a simpler system, less cost to develop, etc.

For the record, a proper turbo system can make boost and power about the same spot that a supercharger will, it all depends on the turbo selection and the design of the system. Sure, you can put turbos on it that will have nearly instant boost, but not any whopping power up top. I just don't believe in building a system like that, there is no need when you can get power down low AND all the way to the top.

What I meant about the 2500-3000rpm range was that a properly spec'd system would be making boost by then, not 'starting' to build boost. From the time you press the throttle down, how long does it take to go from a cruising speed of say 1500-2000rpms, up to 2500rpms? What, a half-second? Its not enough time to be concerned with, really. Turbos are pure torque. Mash the pedal, get the power. Most of the talk about 'turbo lag' is a wives tale or stems from improper system design and turbo selection, at least in this day and age.

Sorry for the long post, but when someone is throwing marshmallows at me, claiming they are oranges, I needed to clarify. If it had been some real issue or some actual wrong-doing, don't you think a person that does that kind of thing would have quietly slinked away at the first accusation, hoping it would quietly blow over...

[Fastest H-Town Realtor]

Ken-

I fully got reponse you gave. Car guy,truck guy,bench racer, the info that was posted is accurate. I just didn't understand why it was needed to reference the flamefest post. It doesn't change the accuracy of the post here and now.

Yes, your two paragraphs under the link reference are informative. Yes, the questions IC asked previous put his 'experience" into deep questionability with the crew that knows automotive performance...or even some simple engine principles. Yea,yea,yea...I see that. But, my statement went to the asked question/given response. That was all.

As for " tried to save him some embarrassment. You prolonged it" part, I do believe that IC can cover his own. And any clip-n-paste from the linked thread is still not technical information, as asked in the original authors question.Isn't there another forum on this site more suited to the rehashing of previous posts?

And for me, say as you shall. Im here for the tech info and relevant H2 offerings. Nothing more. If it is a flamefest your looking for, I'll move on to another post. Im not interested.

[LasVegas]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by GeorgeSSSS:
Has anyone owned both a turbo charged H2 and a supercharged one? -- -- or driven one of each? A comparison of the two systems responsiveness and other issues would be worth reading.

George SSSS </div></BLOCKQUOTE>George...I've not driven a supercharged H2 but I think I'm the only member with a turbocharged H2 (remote mount STS). If I had to guess, and it's a guess, the supercharger probably has little more torque from a dead stop than the turbo. But I can tell you it's only a second or two to from a dead stop when the turbo comes in and then it's a screamer. Anything above 1500 rpm the boost is there and just keeps screaming.

[Induction Concepts]

OK, I would like to mention a few things. Yea, yea, I know some of you will say I'm a competitor, but I don't consider any remote-mount turbo a competitor with what we do. We focus on a totally different type of customer, and end result, with a totally different (exactly opposite practically) design philosophy. I mean yes, a turbo is involved, but that's where the similarities end. We don't even make a twin turbo system for the H2's. We would if there was enough demand, we just haven't seen it yet, so thats beside the point.

I answered a post on here yesterday or the day before, someone asking about one of those air tornado things on ebay for $20. The guy is looking for a performance improvement, he just didn't know any better. We are all ignorant until we learn, and there's certainly nothing wrong with that.

Anyway, I have seen quite a bit of talk here about remote mount turbos and I think there are many things that the general public doesn't know about this type of design. Unless you have a very thorough knowledge of turbo system design, you have no way of knowing these things. But if you're going to lay down your money for something, especially several thousand dollars, wouldn't you want to have all of the facts? I think that if you read these points, you'll see that they are all common-sense items when you understand whats going on. I'm going to explain all of this in simple layman's terms, so regardless of your technical skill level, you will understand and learn.

LasVegas: I'm not trying to insult or disrespect you in any way, everyone has their own preferences, opinions, and goals. its what makes this country great. In fact I applaud you for taking the turbo plunge. I am just trying to provide some information so that people are well informed and can make an educated, purchasing decision, something that is never a bad thing.

But, for the sake of this turbo vs supercharger comparison, there are some things to note that are different on a remote-mount type of setup than with a conventional turbo system.

First, for those of you who know nothing about a turbo, here are some basics. You know those pinwheels you played with as a kid? They have a fan type wheel on one end of a stick. If you blow on it, it spins. OK, now picture one of those, but instead of the stick coming down, having a shaft attached to the center of that wheel, running out the back, away from the wheel. On the other end, is another pinwheel, facing the opposite direction, so they would both be facing out, away from each other. If you blow on one, it also turns the other one because they are joined by that common shaft. A turbo is a lot like this inside. One side is the exhaust or turbine side. The heat/energy from the exhaust coming out of your engine spins one of these wheels, called the turbine wheel. This in turn spins the wheel on the other end of the shaft, the compressor wheel, which sucks air into the turbo inlet. This air is spun around an increasingly smaller passage inside the compressor cover/housing, which compresses the air making positive boost pressure. That may not sound like it could do much, but turbos typically spin at 60,000-120,000 rpms when in their efficiency range, with 90,000-100,000rpms being common, depending on the size of the turbo. Thats fast. At 100,000rpms, thats almost 1700 revolutions per second. This speed is what makes it all happen. This positive boost pressure crams air into the cylinders, thus the term 'forced' induction. Ok, now you know the basics of how a turbo works, I'll get on with the differences I mentioned.

Exhaust Heat/Energy: A turbo is driven off of exhaust heat and energy, as I just explained, this is just the pure physics of a turbo's design. When the turbo is 15 feet away from the exhaust valve, instead of the normal 12-24", there isn't much heat energy left. I mean from 900 degrees to 200 (or less) is a pretty major decrease in temps and energy. You can actually grap the end of a tailpipe with your hand while the engine is running. It is hot, but not hot like grabbing ahold of your header. There is a formula somewhere that calculates the temperature drop for every inch you move away from the heat source. You want a turbo as close as possible to the exhaust valve for this very reason.

Exhaust Distance/Restriction: The more distance you have between the exhaust valve and the the turbine wheel, the more restriction that adds up. This means slower air velocity, slower turbine wheel speed, less boost and more time required to build boost.

This all means that you have to work the turbo much harder, to make the same amount of boost and power at the engine. For instance to get 5psi of boost at the engine, the turbo is having to make say 10psi, maybe more. This effectively cuts the power of the turbo in half. For instance on a turbo that can make say 30psi max, you may only be able to get 15psi out of it, max. So you are only getting half of the power potential of the turbo you paid full price for.

Charged Air Distance/Restriction: Now, on the flipside, the same is true for the charged air. Charged air is the air that is sucked in by the turbo, through the air filter, then compressed by the compressor wheel and sent to the engine, usually also through a front-mounted intercooler. Charged air is also called the cold side.

You are already having to overwork the turbo on the turbine/exhaust side, to get the same amount of boost at the engine, now you have to also push the charged air an EXTRA 15ft back up to the front of the car, then through the intercooler, then into the engine. This is adding more load to the turbo, after all, the compressor wheel is attached to the turbine wheel by a common shaft, so a restriction or 'drag' on one, affects the other. In effect you have restriction or drag on both of them, compounding the situation. So now its not only slow and under-responsive on the turbine/exhaust side of the turbo, but also having to work harder, on the compressor side, to push this compressed air all the way back to the front of the vehicle to get it into the engine. This extra effort, to spin the compressor wheel, in turn makes it harder for the exhaust to turn the turbine wheel, when the exhaust heat/energy is already crippled to begin with.

You know those pinwheels I mentioned above? Ok, imagine blowing on that while holding your finger out and dragging it against the tips of the blades as they are trying to turn...restriction. Restriction is the enemy of a turbo system.

Here's a real world example to put that into perspective. I had a pair of Dynomax Race Bullet mufflers on a turbo car. They are straight through mufflers, no chambers. I like the way flowmasters sound on a hotrod. I knew that chambered mufflers were not a good choice to run on a turbo car, but I really liked the way they sounded much better than the bullets. I thought there would be a small difference, but nothing major. Besides, it wasn't a race car, it was a daily driver, so we weren't trying to eek every last ounce of power out of it. A small loss would be a worthwhile trade off. The sound of a killer exhaust is almost as big of a part of the whole experience as the power is. The car normally made 12psi on pump gas and made it very quickly. I swapped the bullets for the Flowmasters. And these were 3", 2-chamber flowmasters, so definitely not one of the more restrictive versions. I made no other changes. The power went from 12psi to 8psi, that's a 33% difference! I'd call that a little more than a slight loss of power. And, to top it off, it didn't make boost anywhere near as quickly, the car felt doggy. I promptly took the flowmasters right back off and put the bullets back on. Just the added restriction of those two chambers in the mufflers made that big of a difference.

Charged Air Heat:Turbos have efficiency ranges (efficiency islands) where they operate best. When you move them out of this efficiency range, their performance really falls off and can even go into whats called compressor surge when they can't move enough air. When you compress air, heat is generated, its a law of physics. The more you compress it, the more heat it generates. This is why we use intercoolers, to remove this extra heat we put in from compressing the air. But even the best air/air intercoolers will never reach 100% efficiency, so you can never remove all of the heat that was added, usually 70% is considered an excellent air/air intercooler. Now liquid/air intercoolers can achieve 100% efficiency, sometimes even more, but only when ice water is running through the system. This doesn't work in a street driven car because the ice quickly melts. Its the only way to fly for a racecar though. Well now you are having to generate twice the boost at the turbo (more heat) to make half the boost at the engine, because the turbos are so far away, so you have more heat, which means less dense air, which means less of it can fit in the cylinder. It also means you are more prone to detonation, which is very bad...engine-destroying bad. So its not a matter of just cranking up the boost to offset these problems. At a certain point, you will move the turbo outside of its efficiency range and only generate more heat, not more power. For instance on a 60-1 turbo, it makes its maximum power at 24psi. Sure, you can turn it up to 35psi, but it won't make any more power, it will only generate a lot more heat, in effect making less power (less dense air).

Restriction vs Volume:As I mentioned already, the same distance problem on the hot side also affects the charged air side. The further you have to push this air, the more restriction you have. This equates to less air getting into the engine. Think of a garden hose with water pouring out. When you place your thumb over the end, it starts to spray. That would seem like a good thing, but what it is doing is causing a restriction. Yes, it makes the water spray, but it is reducing the amount, or volume, of air coming out of the hose. In an internal combustion engine, its the volume of air that makes power, not the speed of it.

More Air = More Fuel
More Air + More Fuel = More Power

Yes, increasing the speed of the air will increase the volume to a point, but then the pressure goes up and the volume drops off and you've reached a point of diminishing returns. We face a similar challenge with fuel systems and fuel pressure. We can't only increase the pressure, we must increase the volume.

Boost = Restriction: This may be a little more difficult to understand. Boost is a measure of restriction on the air we are forcing into the cylinders. An engine that is more efficient, free-flowing air cleaner, straight shot of air into the throttle body (or carb), larger intake runners, no sharp corners, ported and polished intake, ported and polished heads, cam(s) optimized for the application, oversized valves, headers with large primary tubes and collector, large diameter exhaust, no cats, no sharp bends, straight-through mufflers, etc., will make more power at less boost than say a stock, or less efficient version of that same engine. Its making more power and moving more air, with less boost (restriction). Its simple, the more air (volume) you can cram into the cylinder, the more more fuel you can add, and therefore more power you can make. Here's an example. Lets say you can make 600hp at the tires with 12psi on a stock engine. Forget about the weak factory internals for a second. Now, take the same engine, with the same displacement, but with the improvements listed above, it might make that same 600hp at the tires at 8psi. As a side effect of less boost, you have less heat and are less prone to detonation, so its safer for the engine.

Pressure: Now, think about pressure for a minute, imagine pressurizing a pipe that is 2" in diameter and 2 ft long. Now, imagine having to pressurize that same 2" pipe, but now its 17 ft long. It takes a lot more air to pressurize it. It also takes more time. Again, on a system that is already hurting on exhaust energy and extra drag. The problems compound.

Vacuum/Boost Reference Signal: If you read the instructions for any quality electronic boost controller, they will stress to mount the solenoid as close as possible to the wastegate. This is to keep the vacuum line that sends the vacuum/boost signals between the boost controller and wastegate as short as possible, because these signals are adversely affected by distance. The general rule is to keep them no longer than 2 ft.

Well, when the turbo and wastegate are mounted by the rearend, you're going to have 15ft of vacuum tubing and usually it takes 2 of these vacuum lines running to the wastegate, one to the bottom side of the wastegate and one to the top. You can't just mount the solenoid back by the turbo either, because it has vacuum/boost signals running to and from it (usually 3 or 4), between the wastegate, the intake manifold, and an inside controller with a display or gauge, so that won't solve the problem.

Factory Exhaust: One of the advertised strong points of the remote mount type of turbo is the fact that it uses the factory exhaust system, one of the reasons why its cheaper, and easier. The factory exhaust system is usually anything but optimal for airflow. Thats one of the first modifications that many do, is chunk the whole factory exhaust system for a set of headers, an h/x-pipe, either ditch the cats or replace them with high-flowing versions and new mufflers. Often a larger size of exhaust pipe is also used. The factory exhaust is usually quite small, just large enough for the stock power level. It usually features compression bends instead of mandrel bends. Now, if you replace your entire exhaust system with a larger version of the upgraded pieces I just mentioned, then you've solved these problems...and added an extra $1500 to the cost.

So, a remote mount turbo system is going to:
- Build boost slower
- Generate more heat and restriction in the charged air system
- Make less boost at the engine, compared to the boost the turbo is actually making
- And because of the above, make less power for that particular boost level. Remember, when you're seeing 5psi at the engine, you're actually running probably twice that amount at the turbo. So if the system makes X hp at Y psi, its kind of misleading because that boost level is measured at the engine instead of at the turbo. Otherwise, it would be much less flattering numbers to measure the boost that the turbo is actually making vs the hp at that boost setting. As an example, lets say it makes 350hp at the tires at 5psi. At first glance, that sounds like a decent number. But when you measure that same boost at the turbo, instead of up front at the engine, the turbo may be generating 10-12psi, and 350hp at 10-12psi is far from flattering. 600hp at the tires @ 8-9psi is flattering.

There are several other things about these types of designs that I could mention, but they are typical design and component selection issues that most turbo companies (not us) also do, so they're not relevant to this post on the differences between a remote mount and a conventional turbo system.

Now, the remote-mount type of turbo systems do have their place. If you've just got to have a turbo, and you're looking for the bare-bones, cheapest way to get a turbo, that is it. I believe I saw a remote mount on a website, a year or two ago. A couple of guys trying to figure out the absolute cheapest and easiest way they could build their own home-made turbo system.

A proper turbo system is very difficult to design correctly and it takes a great deal of effort, time and money. In my opinion, a remote mount design is a poor shortcut. Turbos have been around for well over 100 years, like superchargers. Its never been done that way, before now. Was it because no one ever thought of doing it this way, or couldn't figure out how to do it this way? Is it beyond the mental capacity of people like Gale Banks, Corky Bell or John Lingenfelter? Or could it be because of the issues I just mentioned?

I know that SEMA gave out an award for a remote mount type system. I'll reserve my comments and thoughts on that.

Everybody wants a turbo, they just don't want to pay what it costs for a proper system. Like anything that's done right, with top quality parts and components, its expensive. You guys, of all people, should know that you get what you pay for. You drive H2's, you appreciate the 'finer' things in life, you know that cheapest is rarely, if ever, best. If that was the case, you'd all be driving Scions instead. Thats why it has surprised me to see so much talk on here about them...but like I said, you have no way of knowing what hasn't been told to you.

I hope this at least sheds some light on some issues that haven't been mentioned. I hope I don't have to dawn my fire-suit now, but probably will. As I said, I am not trying to disrespect anyone, just point out some facts so that people can make well informed decisions. Like I said, we don't even make a kit for the H2s, so I have nothing to gain by sharing this information. We're all automotive enthusiasts and we get on these forums to learn, teach and share in something that brings us all a lot of enjoyment. Cars are much more to me than just a job, they are a part of me, my life, my heartbeat, my breath.

[h2sin]

Turbo = High Maintenance, High risk

Supercharger = Low Maintenance, Low risk

Turbo = More power than your H2 can handle

Supercharger = All the power you will ever need

there, I simplified it for you

BTW if you are building a H2 to go drag racing, go with turbo.. otherwise stick with SC

[LasVegas]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by h2sin:
Turbo = High Maintenance, High risk

Supercharger = Low Maintenance, Low risk

Turbo = More power than your H2 can handle

Supercharger = All the power you will ever need

there, I simplified it for you

BTW if you are building a H2 to go drag racing, go with turbo.. otherwise stick with SC </div></BLOCKQUOTE>Exactly what do you base this on? Experience with one or the other or both or none? If experienced, on an H2 and if not what vehicle? IMO you don't know what you're talking about.

[Induction Concepts]

Actually, all of this is not quite right.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by h2sin:
Turbo = High Maintenance, High risk </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

This is exactly the opposite.

Think of endurance races like the 24 hours of LeMans or Daytona. Those race teams have practically unlimited budgets. They can afford any technology they can dream of, they choose turbos for a reason, because of their dependability and reliability. If superchargers made more power or were more dependable, thats what they'd be running.

Every semi on the road has a turbo. Again, for dependability and reliability. These trucks go hundreds of thousands of miles before a rebuild.

Turbo systems are more complex, simply because they have more tubing, but tubing isn't moving parts, so it doesn't wear out from friction.

Turbos don't require any more maintenance than a supercharger, or a naturally aspirated stock engine for that matter. Regular oil changes with a quality oil and use a quality air filter, things you should do on any car.

With a turbo, it isn't putting extra stress on the front of the crankshaft from belt tension. You also aren't burning extra fuel to spin the supercharger all the time, even when you're not using it (in boost).

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">
Turbo = More power than your H2 can handle </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

With the push of a button, or the turn of a knob, you can adjust the boost level, and therefore the power of the engine, down to practically zero (above the power level without a turbo). Can't do that with a supercharger. Superchargers require at minimum a pulley change and usually also a different belt. Some superchargers drain all of their oil out of their snout when you pull the pulley off for a pulley change.

On the systems that we build, we don't have a stock engine in mind when we pick the turbos, we select the turbos based on something above 500hp simply because we didn't have any interest in building yet another 400-500hp solution, there are already plenty of those out there already. But, by just swapping turbos (different size) (4 bolts and a couple of clamps per turbo), we can select almost any range of power.

There are companies that select their turbos for power levels on a stock engine though.

Our turbos can be run on a stock engine, with the boost turned down, but why spend all that money for only 400-500hp? Our customers just want more power than that, and 95% of our customers are real street vehicles, not clapped out racecars with tags, but vehicles with all of their emissions and accessories (power steering, power brakes, ac, cruise, etc.). Some people will drop off a brand new car, straight from the dealer, we'll pull the engine, have a stronger version built, reinstall it, then install the turbo system.

Our customers all have built engines. And many are nothing 'wild', just with stronger parts in them than what the factory installed, they have a perfect idle and perfect drivability. You'd never know they had a turbos until you put your foot in it.

The bottom line is that power output is a personal choice, some want more, some want less. At least with turbos you have almost an unlimited range of power to choose from, and the adjustability of changing the boost level with the push of a button.


<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">

Supercharger = All the power you will ever need

there, I simplified it for you </div></BLOCKQUOTE>


Again, personal choice.


<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">BTW if you are building a H2 to go drag racing, go with turbo.. otherwise stick with SC </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

As I said in my very first post, if 400-500hp is all the power you seek, then a supercharger is probably the most economical way to go. But turbos aren't only for drag racing, I know I haven't seen many semi's at the strip, but they all have turbos, and they have them because they are dependable and they make a mountain of torque for pulling and towing.

[LasVegas]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">by indjuction.....Anyway, I have seen quite a bit of talk here about remote mount turbos and I think there are many things that the general public doesn't know about this type of design. Unless you have a very thorough knowledge of turbo system design, you have no way of knowing these things. But if you're going to lay down your money for something, especially several thousand dollars, wouldn't you want to have all of the facts? I think that if you read these points, you'll see that they are all common-sense items when you understand whats going on. I'm going to explain all of this in simple layman's terms, so regardless of your technical skill level, you will understand and learn.... </div></BLOCKQUOTE>Induction. I think you're over killing here with the technical jargon. Have you tested or have numbers on a remote mounted system? We're not building dragsters here. These are street/off road rigs. I'm a pragmatist. My remote mounted turbo delivers 6.5 pounds boost, is very responsive, and accomplishes what most people would want or expect with a 4-ton rig. Many have expressed "opinions" here but unless they've had hands on experence they should be asking questions or at best giving "qualified" opinions. Everyone seems to have an opinion but unless they have personal experience they're talking out their ass. I don't try to tell anyone what a supercharged H2 drives like because I've never driven one. Others should extend the same courtesy.

[h2sin]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by LasVegas:
IMO you don't know what you're talking about. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

woot.. dont jump to conclusion now

what part of what I said was not true? please elaborate