[ZX-10R]

I know, ancient question but still interesting to hear perspectives. How many turbo cars have you owned and will you go back?

In terms of power potential, there isn't much of an argument. BMW is squeezing 520 rwhp (dyno, not claimed) out of a 3.0 L motor. Most ZL1s don't put down much more (560 on average) with DOUBLE the displacement (granted 24 psi vs 9 psi). McLaren gets 750 rwhp out of a 4.0 L. Quite a few Audi guys get 600+ out of their 2.5L (modded)

Turbo lag isn't the argument it once was, lag is there at lower rpm, but not terrible. Supercharger generates a very linear power curve but also a little boring? Better gas mileage when you're cruising is another advantage.

Please no EV stuff, we know a Plaid will do x in a roll on

[Camaro1973]

Originally Posted by ZX-10R

I know, ancient question but still interesting to hear perspectives. How many turbo cars have you owned and will you go back?

In terms of power potential, there isn't much of an argument. BMW is squeezing 520 rwhp (dyno, not claimed) out of a 3.0 L motor. Most ZL1s don't put down much more (560 on average) with DOUBLE the displacement (granted 24 psi vs 9 psi). McLaren gets 750 rwhp out of a 4.0 L. Quite a few Audi guys get 600+ out of their 2.5L (modded)

Turbo lag isn't the argument it once was, lag is there at lower rpm, but not terrible. Supercharger generates a very linear power curve but also a little boring? Better gas mileage when you're cruising is another advantage.

Please no EV stuff, we know a Plaid will do x in a roll on

My new 22 bmw x4m comp with mid pipe and racechip just put down 587whp and 563tq. There’s still a little turbo lag at low rpm’s.

I like both tbh.

[KingLT1]

I would rather have more displacement with a positive displacement supercharger using less boost vs a tiny motor on moon boost. It's more reliable and a better power curve.

What many fail to realize is that GM's ancient technology is cheaper and easier to work on. So while all these smaller displacement high boost engines look great on paper, 99% of the owners barely know how to change the oil in them.

[ZX-10R]

Originally Posted by KingLT1

I would rather have more displacement with a positive displacement supercharger using less boost vs a tiny motor on moon boost. It's more reliable and a better power curve.

Good point - and reliability is still a great argument for the higher displacement, lower boost formula (in general). With that said, many owners seem to get acceptable service life out of high boost mouse motors (how well they hold compression after say 70k miles is less well documented)

What many fail to realize is that GM's ancient technology is cheaper and easier to work on. So while all these smaller displacement high boost engines look great on paper, 99% of the owners barely know how to change the oil in them.

Another good point, but most owners don't do much of their own work aside from oil changes

Originally Posted by Camaro1973

My new 22 bmw x4m comp with mid pipe and racechip just put down 587whp and 563tq. There’s still a little turbo lag at low rpm’s.

They have M3/4 xdrive comps running 9s now

[turbo_jimbo]

I prefer turbo setups, but both have merit. I'm sure the daily use MPG would be much better with turbo than sc on the zl1, but who cares? Power is power. For most applications, turbo's are easier to install and cheaper to come by. I'm finishing up a turbo build on my other car, once I finish getting the computer stuff sorted, should be good for around 600whp, but that's a 2.4l 4 cylinder in a car that weighs around 2000lbs.

[Camaro1973]

Originally Posted by ZX-10R

Good point - and reliability is still a great argument for the higher displacement, lower boost formula (in general). With that said, many owners seem to get acceptable service life out of high boost mouse motors (how well they hold compression after say 70k miles is less well documented)



Another good point, but most owners don't do much of their own work aside from oil changes



They have M3/4 xdrive comps running 9s now

I have an x4m though. But even the x4m,s are low 10’s on a bm3 tune and down pipes with e30 and low 7’s 60-130. My DME is locked though, it needs to be sent overseas so for now racechip it is.

Crazy that an suv is in the 10’s. I still need to put the dragy in it and see what mine can do with/without racechip. I didn’t get a chance to do it before the dp and mp.

[Spaceme1117]

Originally Posted by ZX-10R

I know, ancient question but still interesting to hear perspectives. How many turbo cars have you owned and will you go back?

In terms of power potential, there isn't much of an argument. BMW is squeezing 520 rwhp (dyno, not claimed) out of a 3.0 L motor. Most ZL1s don't put down much more (560 on average) with DOUBLE the displacement (granted 24 psi vs 9 psi). McLaren gets 750 rwhp out of a 4.0 L. Quite a few Audi guys get 600+ out of their 2.5L (modded)

Turbo lag isn't the argument it once was, lag is there at lower rpm, but not terrible. Supercharger generates a very linear power curve but also a little boring? Better gas mileage when you're cruising is another advantage.

Please no EV stuff, we know a Plaid will do x in a roll on

I have owned several turbo engine cars and but I now have a C6 Grand Sport that has a positive displacement supercharger.

With most turbo cars which use a single turbo, the turbo is sized for a certain RPM range. So either they have a small turbo that spools quickly with no or little lag but then fall on their face in the upper RPM range. Or they have a larger turbo that doesn't start to build power until 3K or more RPM's but pull to redline. Now cars that are twin turboed with both a small and a larger turbo will have power everywhere but those are much less common nowadays.

The thing I like with my PD supercharged C6 is that it has power everywhere and behaves just like a naturally aspirated car. Instant torque no matter what RPM. And there is little parasitic loss as it has a bi-pass valve when not in boost (most modern supercharged engines have this).

And then there are the centrifugal superchargers like ProCharger that are basically a belt driven turbo. Not as much boost off idle but boost continues to build higher and higher as RPM increases.

So I like both turbos and superchargers but favor superchargers.

[ZX-10R]

Originally Posted by turbo_jimbo

I'm finishing up a turbo build on my other car, once I finish getting the computer stuff sorted, should be good for around 600whp, but that's a 2.4l 4 cylinder in a car that weighs around 2000lbs.

Ecotec? What car?

[ZLRob]

Originally Posted by KingLT1

I would rather have more displacement with a positive displacement supercharger using less boost vs a tiny motor on moon boost. It's more reliable and a better power curve.

What many fail to realize is that GM's ancient technology is cheaper and easier to work on. So while all these smaller displacement high boost engines look great on paper, 99% of the owners barely know how to change the oil in them.

Originally Posted by Spaceme1117

I have owned several turbo engine cars and but I now have a C6 Grand Sport that has a positive displacement supercharger.

With most turbo cars which use a single turbo, the turbo is sized for a certain RPM range. So either they have a small turbo that spools quickly with no or little lag but then fall on their face in the upper RPM range. Or they have a larger turbo that doesn't start to build power until 3K or more RPM's but pull to redline. Now cars that are twin turboed with both a small and a larger turbo will have power everywhere but those are much less common nowadays.

The thing I like with my PD supercharged C6 is that it has power everywhere and behaves just like a naturally aspirated car. Instant torque no matter what RPM. And there is little parasitic loss as it has a bi-pass valve when not in boost (most modern supercharged engines have this).

And then there are the centrifugal superchargers like ProCharger that are basically a belt driven turbo. Not as much boost off idle but boost continues to build higher and higher as RPM increases.

So I like both turbos and superchargers but favor superchargers.

I have had the opportunity to drive both FI applications long term and my rationale lies behind a lot of what you guys are saying. I agree entirely!

I love the way PD cars behave. They are better mannered and if you have never driven a supercharged one, you would hardly know that a vehicle has one besides the noise they generate with how much like an NA vehicle they drive.

[Z OH 6]

For ultimate power and flexibility, turbos win.

[SJFGTO]

Merit to both set ups but for street driving, and at the track, I think a larger displacement engine with a SC has a more linear, less peaky torque and HP curve which translates into having a more immediate, smoother power delivery. Also, just me, but I think heat is somewhat easier to control in a SC set up.

[Mac7504]

For me, on the street, I just very much dislike how the power hits with a turbo car.. To me, it's like nothing nothing nothing, then boom, power! I simple can't get used to it and do not enjoy it very much. That said, I do like how much easier it seems to add power to turbo setups and I enjoy the sound of turbo flutter but this alone is not enough for me to purchase one.

I even tracked a 2020 488 GTB a few times and if I was in the wrong gear, even slightly, the engine very much struggled to keep up. I addressed this with my instructor because he seemed to keep telling me to shift early but fell on deaf ears..

Just my take.

[Spaceme1117]

Probably the best turbo engine car I have ever owned/driven is the LNF powered Saturn Sky Redline. Used a 2.0 liter direct injection with a twin scroll turbo. No turbo lag at all and had a very linear power delivery all the way to redline.

[arpad_m]

Originally Posted by Spaceme1117

Probably the best turbo engine car I have ever owned/driven is the LNF powered Saturn Sky Redline. Used a 2.0 liter direct injection with a twin scroll turbo. No turbo lag at all and had a very linear power delivery all the way to redline.

...and you have just described a positive displacement supercharger