Here is a comparison of dynos, turbo vs SC...pretty interesting.

Setups:

JRSC (red, for those that cant tell ):
6-7ish PSI
3" Short Ram
Kami 2.5" Header
Carsound 2.5" Cat
60mm Exhaust

Turbo (blue):
Drag 3 7PSI
60mm Exhaust



Both Hondata S200B tuned by SGT. Im most surprised at the TQ curve. Kind of shocked at how the turbo pretty much outshines the SC throughout the entire graph. No dips, no masive jumps. I thought I would lose a lot more on the low end going to a turbo..I didnt think an improvement would begin before 4k. Both plots are SAE corrected...JRSC done in maybe 20-30deg colder weather.

0-3800 - Advantage JRSC
3800-8400 -Advantage Turbo

Just some concrete info for the "should I go turbo or SC" guys doing a search and looking for information. There are your powerbands, its your call.

 

great post. there were on identical setups correct. i assume they are. its about time someone did this. and thats only 7psi!!!!!

 

I my drag 3

 

thanks for the post up Nick

that should make a few people realize the difference between a SC and a Turbo setup. I can't wait to get my sc34 on

 

very good thread for people contemplating SC vs turbo. Its ironic how everyone says that SCs are better for auto crossing/road race but the only point on that graph where the SC made more power was below 3.5k rpm. However torque was plentiful on the SC before 5k, but after that torque increases quite a bit more with the turbo.



-ryan

 

Nice, before and after dynos on same motor are priceless.

good info

 

awesome comparo...

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by tegasaurus &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">very good thread for people contemplating SC vs turbo. Its ironic how everyone says that SCs are better for auto crossing/road race but the only point on that graph where the SC made more power was below 3.5k rpm. However torque was plentiful on the SC before 5k, but after that torque increases quite a bit more with the turbo.

-ryan</TD></TR></TABLE>

When dealing with on throttle off throttle and back on situations, the supercharger
will win in terms of response. That is why people say that. This graph is a straight
wide open throttle comparison only. In turns, its a little bit different.

 

All turbos and centrifugal superchargers suffer from lag, while spooling. With a smaller AR trim like maybe .48 no lag would really be noticeable, but throttle response w/the supercharger is still going to be better in lower rpms. I really don't agree that a supercharger is better than a turbo for autox/roadracing, tuning and the right setup to meet your goals is the only thing you should be worried about.

 

How does this make any sense, how can there be a 27 hp difference between two Forced Induction setups that are running the same psi? I understand the parasidic loss of driving the supercharger with the crank, but the turbo also create power loss through heat and backpressure. Let's put it this way, if you disconnect your powersteering and a/c belts you'll gain like what, 7whp to the wheels? So how can a s/c create more than 10-15hp parasidic loss?? My only guess was that the turbo was intercooled and the s/c wasnt??

help, confused o_0

 

hey lets see intake temp comparisan's. i know you wouldnt compare an intercooled turbo setup boosting 7psi after ic psi drop to a jrsc boostin 6-7psi with no ic or water injection. did you use a cat on the turbo setup?

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by phobi9 &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">How does this make any sense, how can there be a 27 hp difference between two Forced Induction setups that are running the same psi? I understand the parasidic loss of driving the supercharger with the crank, but the turbo also create power loss through heat and backpressure. Let's put it this way, if you disconnect your powersteering and a/c belts you'll gain like what, 7whp to the wheels? So how can a s/c create more than 10-15hp parasidic loss?? My only guess was that the turbo was intercooled and the s/c wasnt??

help, confused o_0</TD></TR></TABLE>

Not every turbo and supercharger at 7psi is going to make the same hp. A little greddy td04 at 10psi will not make as much power as a t3/t4 at 10psi but the tq curve will show where the turbos make their peak power at different times. The supercharger looks to make power about the same time, just less.

 

Both torque curves were pretty flat. Id take that extra hp and torque anyday.

 

turbo is actually compresing more air. im sure the cfm rating at 7psi is higher on the turbo. back to my earlier questions. was the jrsc water injected? was the wastgate tube on the turbo hooked up to the intake mani or the nipple on the turbo?

 

Turbo owns

 

Very nice.

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by sgT &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">

When dealing with on throttle off throttle and back on situations, the supercharger
will win in terms of response. That is why people say that. This graph is a straight
wide open throttle comparison only. In turns, its a little bit different.</TD></TR></TABLE>

Interesting hypothesis. Yet, WRC, LM prototypes, GT, and many other road racing vehicles have turbocharged systems.

Personally, on the road course, I like the tip-in throttle modulation that the turbo allows on exits. The turbo sizing has more to do with the "on/off" throttle response you talk about. There is no lag whatsoever in my case, and many other turbo cars I have experienced on the road course at race pace. However, I would like to drive a SC'd car that is comparable to mine to further clarify this turbo/sc debate.

But since 90% of the people on this forum never even use their equpiment on an actual road course, this debate is null.

 

Interesting dynochart. thanks i was always confused because a SC owerner(driving his JRSC@18psi, custom made pulley) told me SC make lot's of more power.

Calvin

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by sgT &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">

When dealing with on throttle off throttle and back on situations, the supercharger
will win in terms of response. That is why people say that. This graph is a straight
wide open throttle comparison only. In turns, its a little bit different.</TD></TR></TABLE> Ya I was going to say that dam you man

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by KraZEtEggIE &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">hey lets see intake temp comparisan's. i know you wouldnt compare an intercooled turbo setup boosting 7psi after ic psi drop to a jrsc boostin 6-7psi with no ic or water injection. did you use a cat on the turbo setup?</TD></TR></TABLE> From my understanding the Jrsc does not come with a intercooler so there only good for 6 to 7 psi. So even if the turbo ran the same amount of boost if it has a cooler then this is not a good comparison. And like KraZETEggIE said what type of exhaust did the turbo car have. Don't get me wrong guys I know the a turbo will out performe a Roots blower as you up the boost.

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by phobi9 &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">How does this make any sense, how can there be a 27 hp difference between two Forced Induction setups that are running the same psi? I understand the parasidic loss of driving the supercharger with the crank, but the turbo also create power loss through heat and backpressure. Let's put it this way, if you disconnect your powersteering and a/c belts you'll gain like what, 7whp to the wheels? So how can a s/c create more than 10-15hp parasidic loss?? My only guess was that the turbo was intercooled and the s/c wasnt??

help, confused o_0</TD></TR></TABLE>
A SC will definently cause more drag on your engine than a PS pump or other accesorios. In other words a SC is harder to spin. At least a roots style (JRSC) is.

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by calvinPGMFI &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">Interesting dynochart. thanks i was always confused because a SC owerner(driving his JRSC@18psi, custom made pulley) told me SC make lot's of more power.

Calvin</TD></TR></TABLE>18PSI?????!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! OMG! I'd like to see the intake temps on that! I have a SC on my R & I can't imagine more that 10PSI @ the most. On a hot day intake temps would be out the roof!

 

60mm = 2.36 diameter right? So by that, the turbo setup had a smaller exhaust, and still made ~25 more hp than the JRSC did with a 2.5"(75mm?).

By that I'm thinking what's all the fuss about needing a 2.5" or larger exhaust on turbo cars. How much more power would that turbo have made with a 2.5" over a 60mm exhaust?

*Edit: I don't know why the hell I was thinking he had a full 2.5" exhaust on the JRSC setup. Doh, Me =


Modified by Nihilation at 11:30 PM 7/8/2004

 

I gained 30 whp alone going from 2.25 to a 3" exhaust. Trust me It helps.

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by 95GSRTT &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">I gained 30 whp alone going from 2.25 to a 3" exhaust. Trust me It helps.</TD></TR></TABLE>