Not another turbo vs supercharger question

**wpbboy** · 03-24-2015

Well it is....but not so much as to which puts down more power, we all know the answer to that. My question is how is this.....from what i read, if you put a blower on a non aspirated engine, that engine will produce more power than a stock gtp engine with the same tune because of the compression difference. so i was wondering why is it that turboing a gtp would produce more hp than a GT (according to the zzp and such)? i hope i asked in a way thats understandable. if not , why is this possible......Supercharged GT over GTP yet Turbo'd would be GTP over GT

**nos4blood70** · 03-24-2015

Not same tune, but properly tuned. The same tune will likely blow the motor. Honestly, just don't listen to ZZP.

**wpbboy** · 03-24-2015

k thanx. i was just wondering. i was looking to get another GP but was thinking of going the turbo route this time around, but wasnt sure if i should just get a GT this time and go from there. if not, i still have my blower and upper intake from my old car in case. thanx for the response

**naminator** · 03-24-2015

The L36 has higher compression. From what I understand (take what I say with a grain of salt) the L36 can produce more power with a flatter curve with a supercharger. Turbo'd cars can produce more top end power because of the spooling of the turbo takes time.

Therefore, a Turbo L67 can handle a higher boost level versus a turbo L36 (due to lower compression in the L67) but a supercharged L36 can produce more power than a stock l67.

It is like comparing Oranges and Hotdogs. Both are totally different mechanisms that produce the same results (increased air into engine) but get to the result in totally different ways. The SC saps horsepower to produce increased air intake, providing a relatively flat boost curve. Turbos take a longer time to spool up creating a more gradual boost curve.

Or you know, leprechauns. Like I said I am just getting into this sh!t and have no idea how it works, but I understand some of the basics.

**wpbboy** · 03-24-2015

Thanx, that answers my question. Its been a while since i read that, i've been away from GP's almost 2 yrs, and was basing the question off memory. But i forgot it was that a supercharged L36 makes more power then a STOCK L67, not a tuned one. I really appreciate the help fellas.

**Reptile** · 03-24-2015

Higher compression equals more base HP, HOWEVER.......
The L36 engines can't handle the overall power that turbo's normally help produce. Rods are thinner, Pistons aren't as thick etc. The L67 is built for blown applications, and through a turbo you can crank the boost to 20 psi and net a whole lot more power. Running a supercharged car that high without an intercooler is knocking on the devil's door.

**16MustangVet** · 03-24-2015

So much randomness spewed in this thread its not even worth commenting.............

**NebTurboST5** · 03-24-2015

Originally Posted by 98MailboyVet

So much randomness spewed in this thread its not even worth commenting.............

yet you did anyway...

let me boil it down...you pick up power with the m90 on a higher compression motor because it helps keep the m90 in its efficiency range. turbos are much more efficient then the m90 and therefore can operate at higher boost levels then the m90 while still saying in their max efficiency range. you can run more boost through a lower compression motor all other things being equal. thats why people do top swaps and want l67 bottom ends for turbo builds...fyi all of this is moot if you compare a turbo to a more efficient supercharger ie whipple, kennebelle, tvs, etc.

**16MustangVet** · 03-24-2015

More randomness,

@ NebTurboST5

First doesn't the engine RPM have a greater effect on keeping the m90 in its efficiency range than compression? In which case the rpm of the engine also effects turbo lag or lack there of than compression?

You can run more boost on a lower compression all things being equal? So if both had same rods since they are different between the non SC and SC engines..... All things being equal @ same boost level the lower comp engine would just make less HP if all things were indeed equal.....

To the OP what are the goals what is the budget? M90s are cheaper forsure but depending on how far you want to take it a turbo setup might be better in the long run if you want to make over 350ish whp. Also depending on what model you start with 1st decides more than just compression, it also includes transmission gearing.......(gearing a whole different topic depending on what power adder is being used.)

@ Reptile "Running a supercharged car that high without an intercooler is knocking on the devil's door." NO ITS NOT....... there are exceptions I know you know this as well IT CAN BE DONE on E85 and stock heads I have @ 18 ish psi on a good day or so says the little aeroforce on the dash...... PSI is arbitrary anyways I could give a damn less what the car makes for boost, each engine is different and too many factors play into it to care such as pulley size, intercooled or not, ported or stock heads, headers or just a downpipe ect ect ect......

NONE of this is meant to start a pissing match but first of all What is the budget what is the goal and what is the starting model of the vehicle need to be addressed 1st!!!!

**coolone** · 03-25-2015

There are no pissing matches, just different experiences and all are valid. And true, the OP needs a plan or to set goals. Otherwise it'll be an endless experiment trying to get the car where you want it.

As for my $.02, if you want to chase ultimate HP, whipple or tvs it at a great expense. But that's just me, I love the SC over a Turbo. But Turboing the engine is a better bang for the $$$. The M90 is terribly inefficient, but we all trade efficiency by dropping pulleys for more boost. There is a crossover. Is why intercooling or high octane race gas (through whatever means) is utilized to offset some of those inefficiencies.

On an L67 it is better prepared for the higher boost as mentioned, piston ring set up being one thing not mentioned. And yeah, the lower compression will create less HP, all being equal otherwise, but also better suited to handle the higher boost of the Turbo. It's a game of Russian Roulette because if you go the route of chasing HP, you'll go until you blow! Lolz...

Then of course there's always the glass tranny to keep in mind!

: )

Good Luck!

**NebTurboST5** · 03-25-2015

Originally Posted by 98MailboyVet

More randomness,

@ NebTurboST5

First doesn't the engine RPM have a greater effect on keeping the m90 in its efficiency range than compression? In which case the rpm of the engine also effects turbo lag or lack there of than compression? Compression of the motor has nothing to do with blower efficiency, however, higher compression and less boost (keeping the blower closer to its efficiency range) can give you the same power.

You can run more boost on a lower compression all things being equal? So if both had same rods since they are different between the non SC and SC engines..... All things being equal @ same boost level the lower comp engine would just make less HP if all things were indeed equal.....yes this is all correct, thats why most stock gt's that get a turbo kit thrown at them make less power then most gtp's that get a turbo kit. the lower compression allows the L67 guys to run more boost right out of the gate.

To the OP what are the goals what is the budget? M90s are cheaper forsure but depending on how far you want to take it a turbo setup might be better in the long run if you want to make over 350ish whp. Also depending on what model you start with 1st decides more than just compression, it also includes transmission gearing.......(gearing a whole different topic depending on what power adder is being used.)

@ Reptile "Running a supercharged car that high without an intercooler is knocking on the devil's door." NO ITS NOT....... there are exceptions I know you know this as well IT CAN BE DONE on E85 and stock heads I have @ 18 ish psi on a good day or so says the little aeroforce on the dash...... PSI is arbitrary anyways I could give a damn less what the car makes for boost, each engine is different and too many factors play into it to care such as pulley size, intercooled or not, ported or stock heads, headers or just a downpipe ect ect ect......

NONE of this is meant to start a pissing match but first of all What is the budget what is the goal and what is the starting model of the vehicle need to be addressed 1st!!!!

my message had to be 3 characters.

**wpbboy** · 03-25-2015

The thing is I know feel ill be satisfied around the 350ish whp range. I never got to complete my last build due to transmission going and not having the money to fix it, therefore i dont know if it woulda been enough or not. I think it woulda been being that i dont race. I regretted selling the car ever since. The trans is definitely a priority this time around. I was just wondering about turbo because i drive my friend's wrx occasionally and love how the turbo kick feels. Im leaning more so to just finish my original build plan.

**blueguy** · 03-25-2015

Originally Posted by 98MailboyVet

@ Reptile "Running a supercharged car that high without an intercooler is knocking on the devil's door." NO ITS NOT....... there are exceptions I know you know this as well IT CAN BE DONE on E85 and stock heads I have @ 18 ish psi on a good day or so says the little aeroforce on the dash...... PSI is arbitrary anyways I could give a damn less what the car makes for boost, each engine is different and too many factors play into it to care such as pulley size, intercooled or not, ported or stock heads, headers or just a downpipe ect ect ect......NONE of this is meant to start a pissing match but first of all What is the budget what is the goal and what is the starting model of the vehicle need to be addressed 1st!!!!

Tyler.

He runs corn.

He's well aware.

He was talking about just a pump gas hero, ragged edge tuning, lean, mucho timing, tiny pulley. It's not safe.

Don't jump on the bandwagon and start another war...just to poke. Let it roll.

**naminator** · 03-25-2015

I am in the same boat as you. Honestly get an L67 powered car, install the recommended mods and drop a pulley size or two. That will probably net you enough power.

You could also top swap an L36, but why not start with a car that already has those parts?

Turbo would be expensive and mostly impractical for your desires. I wanted to go down the turbo route and have been told constantly that for the 300ish HP range you should stick SC. The transmission is the week point though but lots of great threads about how to make those numbers and have a solid tranny.

**blueguy** · 03-25-2015

Originally Posted by naminator

You could also top swap an L36, but why not start with a car that already has those parts?

By the time you get done with a top swap, it'd damn near be the cost of a used turbo setup. Especially with all the headaches of ripping the entire motor down to the short block.

**16MustangVet** · 03-25-2015

Originally Posted by blueguy

Tyler.

He runs corn.

He's well aware.

He was talking about just a pump gas hero, ragged edge tuning, lean, mucho timing, tiny pulley. It's not safe.

Don't jump on the bandwagon and start another war...just to poke. Let it roll.

My point exactly I know he runs E85 so it should be obvious it can work, has nothing to do with my opinion on E85 lol......

And since when is a topswap damn near the cost of a used turbo kit? Cmon Nick no need to start with the Nick math.... Err I mean snowflake math HA!

**blueguy** · 03-25-2015

By the time you buy headers, gaskets, fluids, credits for tuning...and some turbo setups are getting cheaper and cheaper...so yeah, damn near.

**16MustangVet** · 03-25-2015

Cheaper as in under 1k? 1500 max? I think not. And if people cant do the work themselves that's rule #1 of modding cars. = Thy shall fix own sh1t. Cant work on your own junk or don't know how? Learn google is a hell of a tool. Still don't know how or don't want to? Please stay away from tools and modded vehicles all together then.......