Supercharger or Turbo

MikeyS281 · September 11th, 2006, 06:07 PM

Which do you like better? Any suggestions or pros and cons would be awesome.

mdvaldosta · September 11th, 2006, 06:38 PM

Superchargers are easy to install and can make very good horsepower... more horsepower than most engines can handle without a being built with forged internals.

Turbochargers are no doubt more efficient and can make considerably more power. Disadvantages are a much more difficult install, the complexity (compared to a blower install) is much more - thus they cost more. If you've got the budget there is no replacement for a proper twin turbo setup.

1slo5.0 · September 11th, 2006, 07:18 PM

Turbo hands down.

MikeyS281 · September 12th, 2006, 02:14 PM

Awesome, the kit that I plan on getting is the HP twin turbo setup.

1gunner23 · September 12th, 2006, 10:36 PM

Originally Posted by Darrell

Turbo hands down.

X2

wikdsvt · September 15th, 2006, 09:05 AM

The supercharger is a easier install and tune. I will be trying the turbo route soon and will build a kit. The gains and potential are awesome with a turbo. Something about driving around in a stang with a turbo...definately turns heads...

MSO · September 21st, 2006, 11:52 PM

i like turbos, but only cuz i got a 4 banger, hehe

KaZpeR · September 26th, 2006, 12:00 AM

you suck

jk

88BlueGT · September 29th, 2006, 05:33 PM

I agree with everyon else and would have to say that turbo's hands down. ALSO, everyone thinks that turbo's are so expensive. If you think about it, they are really not. By the time you by a intercooled supercharger your talking 3.5K minimum. Than add fuel pump, injectors, maf, headers, midpipe, etc. etc. etc. you come out to the same price as a turbo kit that already comes with that stuff. Im not sure what kind of cars you guys have but I have a 93 GT and I was going to go with a h/c/i Novi setup. The turbo will be about four hundred dollars more than a supercharger (including supporting mods) BUT with the turbo I dont have to buy a set of aftermarket heads because a turbo with bolt ons (not heads) on a 5.0 will produce 450rwhp with ease. So, if I would of spent $1,300 on heads right there I just saved myself $900 dollars by going with a turbo. Yes, they are a little bit more expensive BUT they are well worth it, the power, the torque, etc. is unbelievable. Good luck with your decision! And all of this is being based off of a non intercooled novi 1000. If you went with a intercooled charger you would be way over the price of a turbo. You can get a nice stage one kit for a 5.0 to produce 400rwhp for under 4K shipped easy.

matrixpuba · September 30th, 2006, 10:32 AM

turbo baby!!!!
all the way

ChrisJ · September 30th, 2006, 10:37 AM

Turbo FTW!

View Poll Results: Which one
Supercharger	7	30.43%
Turbo(s)	16	69.57%
Voters: 23. You may not vote on this poll

September 11th, 2006, 06:07 PM	#1
MikeyS281 Regular 1999 Mustang GT 14.2 no mods, bald tires Join Date: Aug 2006 Location: Cincinnati, OH Posts: 191 iTrader: 0 reviews	Supercharger or Turbo Which do you like better? Any suggestions or pros and cons would be awesome.

September 11th, 2006, 07:18 PM	#3
1slo5.0 MM Ninjas! 1990 Mustang LX 9.36@143 mph Join Date: Jan 2006 Location: North Fond du Lac, Wisconsin Posts: 11,375 iTrader: 1 reviews	Turbo hands down. __________________ My daily driver has 16 cylinders and 4400hp @ 1000 rpm.... ***1988 Mustang GT - Stock....almost

September 21st, 2006, 11:52 PM	#7
MSO Banned Join Date: Jul 2006 Location: アメリカ Posts: 5,954 iTrader: 0 reviews	i like turbos, but only cuz i got a 4 banger, hehe __________________ [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC] [SIZE="5"][FONT="Arial Black"]OBEY THE FACE![/FONT][/SIZE] Edited By Moderator. Next time will be a ban.

September 26th, 2006, 12:00 AM	#8
KaZpeR Regular Join Date: Jul 2006 Posts: 105 iTrader: 0 reviews	you suck jk __________________ you know your a ricer if you can fist fuck your exhaust tip

September 11th, 2006, 06:38 PM	#2
mdvaldosta MM Fanatic 2002 Mustang GT 11.47@120.58 Join Date: Aug 2005 Location: Valdosta, GA Posts: 3,940 iTrader: 0 reviews	Superchargers are easy to install and can make very good horsepower... more horsepower than most engines can handle without a being built with forged internals. Turbochargers are no doubt more efficient and can make considerably more power. Disadvantages are a much more difficult install, the complexity (compared to a blower install) is much more - thus they cost more. If you've got the budget there is no replacement for a proper twin turbo setup.

September 12th, 2006, 02:14 PM	#4
MikeyS281 Regular 1999 Mustang GT 14.2 no mods, bald tires Join Date: Aug 2006 Location: Cincinnati, OH Posts: 191 iTrader: 0 reviews	Awesome, the kit that I plan on getting is the HP twin turbo setup.

September 15th, 2006, 09:05 AM	#6
wikdsvt Newbie Join Date: Jul 2006 Posts: 14 iTrader: 0 reviews	The supercharger is a easier install and tune. I will be trying the turbo route soon and will build a kit. The gains and potential are awesome with a turbo. Something about driving around in a stang with a turbo...definately turns heads...

September 29th, 2006, 05:33 PM	#9
88BlueGT Regular Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: Hamilton, NJ Posts: 202 iTrader: 0 reviews	I agree with everyon else and would have to say that turbo's hands down. ALSO, everyone thinks that turbo's are so expensive. If you think about it, they are really not. By the time you by a intercooled supercharger your talking 3.5K minimum. Than add fuel pump, injectors, maf, headers, midpipe, etc. etc. etc. you come out to the same price as a turbo kit that already comes with that stuff. Im not sure what kind of cars you guys have but I have a 93 GT and I was going to go with a h/c/i Novi setup. The turbo will be about four hundred dollars more than a supercharger (including supporting mods) BUT with the turbo I dont have to buy a set of aftermarket heads because a turbo with bolt ons (not heads) on a 5.0 will produce 450rwhp with ease. So, if I would of spent $1,300 on heads right there I just saved myself $900 dollars by going with a turbo. Yes, they are a little bit more expensive BUT they are well worth it, the power, the torque, etc. is unbelievable. Good luck with your decision! And all of this is being based off of a non intercooled novi 1000. If you went with a intercooled charger you would be way over the price of a turbo. You can get a nice stage one kit for a 5.0 to produce 400rwhp for under 4K shipped easy. __________________ 93 GT - Full Exhaust, 3.90's, Front Tubular Suspension, etc. 88 GT "Big Blue" - Body work & primer!

September 30th, 2006, 10:32 AM	#10
matrixpuba Hardcore Enthusiast Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: tennessee Posts: 2,364 iTrader: 0 reviews	turbo baby!!!! all the way __________________

September 30th, 2006, 10:37 AM	#11
ChrisJ RLY SRS Join Date: Aug 2005 Location: Ft. Meade, MD Posts: 36,744 Blog Entries: 4 iTrader: 9 reviews	Turbo FTW! __________________ 2008 Acura TL Type-S - 2008 EB Ford Expedition - 2002 Boosted GT - Sold Facebook Google+

Remove Advertisements Sponsored Links
Forums at Modded Mustangs Advertisement Advertisement

Threads Similar to: Supercharger or Turbo
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
turbo, twin turbo, or supercharger?	mustangman87	5.0 Mustangs	31	March 6th, 2010 08:35 PM
Supercharger or Turbo?	Stangbro8994	V6 Mustangs	46	May 20th, 2007 12:50 PM
turbo or supercharger	Danderson	V6 Mustangs	39	April 12th, 2007 12:26 AM
Supercharger, Twin Turbo, and Single Turbo	justinsstang	General Tech	24	March 7th, 2007 10:07 PM
Turbo or supercharger?	98StangGT	96-98	13	June 24th, 2006 07:36 PM

All times are GMT -4. The time now is 01:16 AM.
Contact Us - Modded Mustangs - Privacy Statement - Top
Modded Mustangs is ©2005-2008, All Rights Reserved, And is Not Affiliated with Ford Motor Company. Forum is powered by vBulletin ©2000 - 2012, Jelsoft Ent. Ltd. & SEO by vBSEO 3.3.2 ©2009, Crawlability, Inc.