Hard on for turbochargers? - Page 2

fastkevman · 12-08-2007, 03:49 AM

Its incredibly stupid to argue the exact definitions of "turbocharger" and "supercharger" in this thread!

The debate should really be centered around, what it takes to put either system together and the advantages/disadvantages of either one......last time I checked definitions didn't add one damn horsepower to my engine.....I don't care if these guys call them "thingamabobs" and "doohickeys", I know what they mean!

Some of you guys can really ruin a good thread......you suck!

This ad is not displayed to registered members.
Register your free account today and become a member on Yotatech!

Belize Off Road Team · 12-08-2007, 05:04 AM

why do you think TOYOTA put Turbos in the 22R-TE and in the 3.4L and totally skipped the 3.0? they must have just focased on their diesel turbos then eh???

X-AWDriver · 12-08-2007, 06:44 AM

Turbo chargers also aren't effected by altitude as much and will still hit preset boost setting even at a mile high while the SC being dependant on the engine speed will be directly affected since the engine can't breathe in as much air it won't make the same boost at higher altitudes.

Turbochargers on a typical street car lose only about a half second from their sea level times while an SC car will lose about the full second the same way an NA car does.

Turbochargers aren't limited by engine speed which makes a big diff on highend horsepower.

Turbo4Runner · 12-08-2007, 08:05 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by apalmer1

Its not all about power though, there is also durability and driveability to consider, as well as the most important one, offroadability

Most turbochargers just cant live up to the simplistic, enclosed, bolt on design of an SC, as well as they are not positioned as high up on the block which makes them even more succeptible to water damage. Im not saying that there arent some incredibly durrable and efficient turbo's out there that can be used for offroad, but i am saying that for the price the general consumer is going to get better end results from a supercharger.

What makes you say that?

Look at Dakar and just about any Rally Series. Almost ALL turbo charged. That requires WAY more durability then anything most of us need. They hit water and snow like crazy! No belts or tensioner to fail, better intercooling ability and less stress on motor because of no draw from the belt driven compressor.

Quote:

Originally Posted by foot0069

Tc is on time. Take a look at a top fuel car sometime blowers rule no mater what drives em. They are all usually built to pull after they start to spool up some. Rock crawlers need the low end umph. Turbo's need a lot of engineering to get that. But check this out.

http://www.nelsonracingengines.com/video_drive.html

Ya gotta like that
Jim

That's why we regear. What rock crawler doesn't gear WAY down anyway? With dual cases you could run a rotary motor in a rock crawler and do fine. Hey, that would be kinda cool....

Turbo's also don't need any extra engineering to do that, they just need to be properly sized. Yes, a lot of honda kids go out and buy turbos that "support" 600hp and put them on their 1.8 litre motor and they don't see any boost until 6000rpm. However its really not that hard to find a turbo that will be sized correctly for your motor so that you receive benefit from your turbo at very low RPM's, under load - when you need it. The engineering has been done, it just requires a little research.

How many factory supercharged vehicles are there? How many factory turbo charged vehicles are there? That should tell you something...

Here's something else, Turbocharged motors will produce less stress on drive train. A lot of what kills drive train is shock load, i.e. when the slack is taken up in the drive train from dropping the clutch fast. With turbocharged motors the power 'builds' as the turbo spools which doesn't put as hard of an immediate load on the drive train. It's the same logic as why an ARB will help save your CV joints.

I suggest you try both for yourself and decide what you prefer..

j-man · 12-08-2007, 04:59 PM

Heres a link to my buddies 350hp custom turbo setup on the 3.4.
http://www.samsonfab.com/phpbb2/viewtopic.php?t=34
This should answer all your questions regarding stupidchargers vs turbochargers.

Heres a direct bolt on for tacoma turbos - remote mounted.
http://www.ststurbo.com/toyota_tacoma

Asha'man · 12-08-2007, 07:59 PM

Four cylinder cars are generally easier to turbo rather than supercharge, as they typically don't make all that much power to begin with and so can't spare very much to lose turning the blower. V6 and V8 engines can, so they're more frequently used for supercharged applications. Don't get me wrong, though, turbos on 6 and 8 (and greater) cylinder motors make huge power as well. My buddy's '86 Saleen made 425rwhp/450rwtq on a non-intercooled T44 at 8 psi.

Personally I've got a total hardon for turbos. I have a turbo Mustang and would love a turbo setup on the 4Runner. I much prefer turbo whistle and BOV hiss over blower whine, and the way turbos work just makes more sense and seems tougher to me. No, those are not scientific opinions, but that's how I feel.

j-man · 12-08-2007, 08:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Asha'man

Four cylinder cars are generally easier to turbo rather than supercharge, as they typically don't make all that much power to begin with and so can't spare very much to lose turning the blower. V6 and V8 engines can, so they're more frequently used for supercharged applications. Don't get me wrong, though, turbos on 6 and 8 (and greater) cylinder motors make huge power as well. My buddy's '86 Saleen made 425rwhp/450rwtq on a non-intercooled T44 at 8 psi.

Personally I've got a total hardon for turbos. I have a turbo Mustang and would love a turbo setup on the 4Runner. I much prefer turbo whistle and BOV hiss over blower whine, and the way turbos work just makes more sense and seems tougher to me. No, those are not scientific opinions, but that's how I feel.

i agree. Im sure we could all debate about who likes what and for different reasons, but ill tell you that on the 3.4, the difference between the turbo setup and the trd supercharger are huge; the turbo smokes the supercharger on all levels hands down.

j-man · 12-08-2007, 09:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Turbo4Runner

What makes you say that?

Look at Dakar and just about any Rally Series. Almost ALL turbo charged. That requires WAY more durability then anything most of us need. They hit water and snow like crazy! No belts or tensioner to fail, better intercooling ability and less stress on motor because of no draw from the belt driven compressor.

That's why we regear. What rock crawler doesn't gear WAY down anyway? With dual cases you could run a rotary motor in a rock crawler and do fine. Hey, that would be kinda cool....

Turbo's also don't need any extra engineering to do that, they just need to be properly sized. Yes, a lot of honda kids go out and buy turbos that "support" 600hp and put them on their 1.8 litre motor and they don't see any boost until 6000rpm. However its really not that hard to find a turbo that will be sized correctly for your motor so that you receive benefit from your turbo at very low RPM's, under load - when you need it. The engineering has been done, it just requires a little research.

How many factory supercharged vehicles are there? How many factory turbo charged vehicles are there? That should tell you something...

Here's something else, Turbocharged motors will produce less stress on drive train. A lot of what kills drive train is shock load, i.e. when the slack is taken up in the drive train from dropping the clutch fast. With turbocharged motors the power 'builds' as the turbo spools which doesn't put as hard of an immediate load on the drive train. It's the same logic as why an ARB will help save your CV joints.

I suggest you try both for yourself and decide what you prefer..

hey turbo4runner, hows the megasquirt working on your truck? Im debating wether to go megasquirt, or go piggyback like the urd FTC or something similar to that for my 3.4 turbo project.

X-AWDriver · 12-09-2007, 07:32 AM

In a lot of sub 9 second racing classes turboes are handicapped over the Nitroused or SC'd cars since they make so much power to the weight of the car.

Asha'man · 12-09-2007, 09:49 AM

And a lot of that power is torque. Turbo cars just make gobs of torque.

Mmm torque

Turbo4Runner · 12-09-2007, 11:09 AM

Megasquirt is great. Much better than any piggy back stuff. Don't get me wrong, it takes a bit more time, but I think the end result is worth it. I'm running it as a speed density system so I don't have a MAF too. I really like it.

tc · 12-09-2007, 09:47 PM

Any forced induction method will flatten out your torque curve.

apalmer1 · 12-09-2007, 10:13 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Turbo4Runner

What makes you say that?

Look at Dakar and just about any Rally Series. Almost ALL turbo charged. That requires WAY more durability then anything most of us need. They hit water and snow like crazy! No belts or tensioner to fail, better intercooling ability and less stress on motor because of no draw from the belt driven compressor.

Rally cars arent sitting immersed intake deep in mud for elongated periods of time though, and thats what you really have to be worried about. Not to mention the vacume lines associated with turbochargers can also sustain damage, or become brittle and crack. Also, professional rally cars are deep stripped and refurbished after EVERY race.

Im not saying that you cant have a very successful turbo on an offroad vehicle. But you have to think about how many people are really going to have the technical knowledge to create a powerful, fast spooling, and durable turbo setup, compared to the majority of people who can still get power from a supercharger, not have to worry about the complicated stuff, and bolt it on themselves in their garage.

j-man · 12-10-2007, 08:06 AM

"Not to mention the vacume lines associated with turbochargers can also sustain damage, or become brittle and crack."

Dude, do you know how a turbocharged vehicle is built? I suggtest you look at some turbocharged engines and youll see that all the "the vacuum lines" are in the engine bay like a stock motor - why would they become brittle and crack?

"Im not saying that you cant have a very successful turbo on an offroad vehicle. But you have to think about how many people are really going to have the technical knowledge to create a powerful, fast spooling, and durable turbo setup, compared to the majority of people who can still get power from a supercharger, not have to worry about the complicated stuff, and bolt it on themselves in their garage."

Well if you want to just "bolt on the supercharger" and run, your going to have motor damage wether you like it or not eventually. Any time you have forced induction on a stock motor (more air), you have to compensate by adding more fuel which requires a piggyback computer or the like. And to get it to run right after doing that is not just your simple "bolt on" addition. It requires a lot of tuning, and requires cutting in to your vehicles wiring harness which most people are scared to do.

So to reply to your statement that a supercharger is easier to bolt on and go compared to a turbo system, id say that anyone who is desires to get more power out of their vehicle should know how both systems work and choose the system that outperforms the other one for power and efficency, because its power that your after, right? If it's the design and construction of a turbo system thats too complicated for home fabrication, you can buy a kit from STS Turbo Systems thats a few hundred dollars more than a blower for tacomas, slightly modify it for 4runners, as well a universal kit for any car that can be tweeked for individual needs.

grayguy · 12-10-2007, 08:45 AM

To me it comes down to price. I bought the turbo on my car for $150...basically, the cheapest belt driven superchargers are $1000-2000. If I spent that much on a turbo, I would basically have as amazing, top of the line unit.

Turbo4Runner · 12-10-2007, 08:49 AM

If your intake deep in mud you have a lot of stuff you need to be paying attention to, not just your turbo. How many of us intentionally go into mud as deep as our intake? I'm guessing not that many. If you do visit that deep of mud frequently, you should probably be building your rig as such and protecting your turbo is just one of the MANY things you need to protect.

Asha'man had a good point; It's typically easier to package a turbo system in an engine bay with an inline motor, where a roots style blower fits very nicely between the heads of a V motor.

FWIW This the second vehicle I have done a fully custom turbo setup on and I have no welder nor do I know how to weld. It's really not that hard, it just takes longer then a weekend and yeah there probably aren't any instructions for you to follow...

Is it more complex? Yes, it has more moving parts there for its a more complex system.

Is it worth it? That's for you to decide. For me, underpowered vehicles really frustrate me. The first time I drove a 22RE powered truck (before I knew the turbo's existed) I was so torn. Loved the truck but was very frustrated by the lack of power.

Turbo's made these Toyota pickups/4Runners the ultimate trucks, for me.

rentedmule · 12-10-2007, 12:36 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by grayguy

To me it comes down to price. I bought the turbo on my car for $150...basically, the cheapest belt driven superchargers are $1000-2000. If I spent that much on a turbo, I would basically have an amazing, top of the line unit.

I think that's one of the biggest reasons people go turbo. to achieve the same power levels it'll cost you 3-4 times as much. You can only spin a s/c so fast before the bearings let go and bad things happen. there is a good argument that most s/c kits are bolt-on and go but remote-mount turbo set-ups are pretty damn straight-forward too.

there are alot of myths that are always perpetuated in these arguments about turbo vs. s/c.

a centrifugal s/c setup doesn't build boost until higher in the rpm range so it drives exactly like a non-s/c'd car under normal conditions. my girlfriend drives my truck all the time and she hardly noticed any difference after the s/c during normal driving around town.

A roots-type or eaton blower pushes the same amount of air per revolution into the engine at any RPM, they are a fixed displacement supercharger. you'll obviously get more low end power with a fixed-displacement setup because they build boost immediately but they're usually more limited on the top-end compared to a centrifugal.

the boost from a turbo is limited by the wastegate, not the speed of the compressor like it is on a s/c. this means you usually get full boost all at once rather than building it more slowly like on a centrifugal s/c. it's not so much turbo lag that makes a turbo'd car feel so much different than a s/c'd car but the fact that you're getting all your boost essentially at one time.

my gas mileage went up by 1-2 mpg when I supercharged (centrifugal) my 4.3 and that's pretty common. I'm pretty sure I've read that mileage in the 3.4's stays the same or increases with the TRD blower doesn't it? the efficiency of the engine is improved at lower RPMs by decreasing the intake vacuum and it's enough to overcome the extra engine power it takes to drive the supercharger belt. the only time gas mileage suffers is when you're beating on it.

the intake charge temperature argument doesn't apply either - it's just as easy and common to intercool a s/c setup as it is a turbo setup. roots setups are a bit more complicated but it's been done plenty of times with air-liquid systems - almost every s/c'd ford is intercooled (lightning, t-bird supercoupe etc...).

Fuelling is an issue with any forced induction setup. Alot of cars that weren't designed to be high-performance vehicles don't have easily swappable fuel injectors. there's a bunch of solutions - basically its up to the size of your wallet as to which one is best.

Edit: forgot to add that a blow off or recirculation valve is also necessary on a s/c setup. if you let off the gas quickly while under boost that pressure has no where to go, it blows back through the compressor and can damage the impeller. you can also get weird surging problems during part-throttle driving without a recirc valve on a roots blower. I don't know if it's just my s/c setup but the only time i've ever actually heard the BOV is with the hood open on the dyno

Asha'man · 12-10-2007, 08:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Turbo4Runner

If your intake deep in mud you have a lot of stuff you need to be paying attention to, not just your turbo. How many of us intentionally go into mud as deep as our intake? I'm guessing not that many. If you do visit that deep of mud frequently, you should probably be building your rig as such and protecting your turbo is just one of the MANY things you need to protect.

Asha'man had a good point; It's typically easier to package a turbo system in an engine bay with an inline motor, where a roots style blower fits very nicely between the heads of a V motor.

FWIW This the second vehicle I have done a fully custom turbo setup on and I have no welder nor do I know how to weld. It's really not that hard, it just takes longer then a weekend and yeah there probably aren't any instructions for you to follow...

Is it more complex? Yes, it has more moving parts there for its a more complex system.

Is it worth it? That's for you to decide. For me, underpowered vehicles really frustrate me. The first time I drove a 22RE powered truck (before I knew the turbo's existed) I was so torn. Loved the truck but was very frustrated by the lack of power.

Turbo's made these Toyota pickups/4Runners the ultimate trucks, for me.

Your truck sounds badass, where in Denver are you?

Turbo4Runner · 12-10-2007, 08:55 PM

Thanks.. It's a lot of fun...

I'm at Alameda and I25ish..

Asha'man · 12-10-2007, 08:59 PM

Nice, that's pretty close to me (Arapahoe and I25ish). We should drink a beer sometime.

agusgus3 · 12-10-2007, 09:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by j-man

Heres a link to my buddies 350hp custom turbo setup on the 3.4.
http://www.samsonfab.com/phpbb2/viewtopic.php?t=34
This should answer all your questions regarding stupidchargers vs turbochargers.
[/url]

The time and research, that this guy put into that, is what I'm talking about.

Being as i just blew my head gasket last night, my 3RZ/R150F T25 swap has just upped it's standing on my priority list. When i pulled out of my driveway this morning, it was like watching Uncle Buck (Jon Candy) pull away in his beater.

ernest t bass · 12-14-2007, 10:06 PM

our volvo 850 turbo 1997 is such a sweet ride. fast - 0 to 60 in 7 sec flat
top end is 135 miles per hour governed due to the tires. oh and it gets 24 on the hwy, 21 around town. 18 mpg if you drive like a nut.

1984 kawasaki gpz 750 turbo - flat below 4000 rpm then HOLD ON.

most awesome car ever driven 1978 Porsche 930 turbo - no car id rather have.

Turbo4Runner · 12-15-2007, 09:14 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Asha'man

Nice, that's pretty close to me (Arapahoe and I25ish). We should drink a beer sometime.

For sure! I head that way all the time, one of my customers is down that way..

Hey, did you see this thread?
http://www.yotatech.com/f15/colorado...rs-132254-new/

You should come wheelin' with us!

Hijack over..

...Turbo's RULE!

paddlenbike · 12-15-2007, 11:35 AM

I very much prefer turbos to superchargers. I like the fact that turbos are load-dependent, not engine speed-driven, the wastegate governs the boost without regard to elevation changes, no parasitic drag like a belt-driven supercharger, and most importantly, turbos sound awesome!

Here's mine on the dyno with the turbo screaming away.

Despite the large turbo, you'll note how quickly the boost jumps to 15 psi and stays there in this video.

Asha'man · 12-15-2007, 03:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Turbo4Runner

For sure! I head that way all the time, one of my customers is down that way..

Hey, did you see this thread?
http://www.yotatech.com/f15/colorado...rs-132254-new/

You should come wheelin' with us!

Hijack over..

...Turbo's RULE!

Right on. Hit me up sometime.

Posted up, never been wheelin' but it sounds fun.

TURBOS FTW!!!!

12-08-2007, 05:04 AM	#27 (permalink)
Belize Off Road Team Contributing Member Join Date: Apr 2007 Location: Corozal Town, Belize Posts: 2,752	why do you think TOYOTA put Turbos in the 22R-TE and in the 3.4L and totally skipped the 3.0? they must have just focased on their diesel turbos then eh??? __________________ -Phyl 1991 Hilux Surf SSR-G Petrol 3.0L V6 200,000kms l Rancho RS5000 l 31"x10.50"xR15 Pro Comp Xterrain l K&N Air Filter l PP 1" Lift Coil Springs l Optima Blue Top l 12" JBL Subs l Alpine Type R l 80/100W Hella H4 l 1st Gen Roll Bar Mod l FT/RR Diff. Breathers l Smittybilt XRC8 Winch l ARB Bull Bar l トヨタ\|NEVER QUIT

12-08-2007, 06:44 AM	#28 (permalink)
X-AWDriver Contributing Member Join Date: Sep 2003 Location: Littleton,CO Posts: 10,146	Turbo chargers also aren't effected by altitude as much and will still hit preset boost setting even at a mile high while the SC being dependant on the engine speed will be directly affected since the engine can't breathe in as much air it won't make the same boost at higher altitudes. Turbochargers on a typical street car lose only about a half second from their sea level times while an SC car will lose about the full second the same way an NA car does. Turbochargers aren't limited by engine speed which makes a big diff on highend horsepower. __________________ '99 4Runner Highlander 4wd E-locker,rear diff and deckplate mod * 265/75/16 Nitto TerraGrapplers * Yakima Load Warrior rack * clear corners/signals * Tacoma skidplate * Silverstar lamps/fogs Alpine CDA-9831,Bazooka EL Series 250w amp,MTX 10" sub

12-08-2007, 04:59 PM	#30 (permalink)
j-man Registered User Join Date: Feb 2007 Location: Santa Monica, Ca Posts: 205	Heres a link to my buddies 350hp custom turbo setup on the 3.4. http://www.samsonfab.com/phpbb2/viewtopic.php?t=34 This should answer all your questions regarding stupidchargers vs turbochargers. Heres a direct bolt on for tacoma turbos - remote mounted. http://www.ststurbo.com/toyota_tacoma __________________ 2000 4Runner v6 sr5 4x4 5spd: Turbo'ed 99 4Runner v6 Sr5 4x4 5spd: Saw's / OME combo TrueTrac rear 98 4Runner V6 Sr5 4x4 5spd E-locker: Saws / OME combo... EEZI AWN Roof Tent 1.4m 97 4Runner V6 Sr5 4x4 Auto: Saws / OME combo TrueTrac rear 2003 Landcruiser 285 BFG At's and outback roofrack My Baja Trailer Build: http://forum.ih8mud.com/showthread.php?t=179520 http://community.webshots.com/user/bajaroadtrain

12-08-2007, 07:59 PM	#31 (permalink)
Asha'man Registered User Join Date: Jan 2006 Location: Centennial, CO Posts: 870	Four cylinder cars are generally easier to turbo rather than supercharge, as they typically don't make all that much power to begin with and so can't spare very much to lose turning the blower. V6 and V8 engines can, so they're more frequently used for supercharged applications. Don't get me wrong, though, turbos on 6 and 8 (and greater) cylinder motors make huge power as well. My buddy's '86 Saleen made 425rwhp/450rwtq on a non-intercooled T44 at 8 psi. Personally I've got a total hardon for turbos. I have a turbo Mustang and would love a turbo setup on the 4Runner. I much prefer turbo whistle and BOV hiss over blower whine, and the way turbos work just makes more sense and seems tougher to me. No, those are not scientific opinions, but that's how I feel. __________________ --Brian Truck - 1986 4Runner SR5 - 22RE, 5spd, 265K, 3" OME/BJ spacer lift, 31x10.50 TrXus MT's, satin black AR steelies, homemade bikini top Car - 1995 Lexus SC400, red/black, 220K, coilovers, exhaust Pickup - 1985 Toyota Xtra cab pickup - 2wd, 22R, 5spd, 270K miles, 4Runner buckets, currently two colors

12-09-2007, 07:32 AM	#34 (permalink)
X-AWDriver Contributing Member Join Date: Sep 2003 Location: Littleton,CO Posts: 10,146	In a lot of sub 9 second racing classes turboes are handicapped over the Nitroused or SC'd cars since they make so much power to the weight of the car. __________________ '99 4Runner Highlander 4wd E-locker,rear diff and deckplate mod * 265/75/16 Nitto TerraGrapplers * Yakima Load Warrior rack * clear corners/signals * Tacoma skidplate * Silverstar lamps/fogs Alpine CDA-9831,Bazooka EL Series 250w amp,MTX 10" sub

12-09-2007, 09:49 AM	#35 (permalink)
Asha'man Registered User Join Date: Jan 2006 Location: Centennial, CO Posts: 870	And a lot of that power is torque. Turbo cars just make gobs of torque. Mmm torque __________________ --Brian Truck - 1986 4Runner SR5 - 22RE, 5spd, 265K, 3" OME/BJ spacer lift, 31x10.50 TrXus MT's, satin black AR steelies, homemade bikini top Car - 1995 Lexus SC400, red/black, 220K, coilovers, exhaust Pickup - 1985 Toyota Xtra cab pickup - 2wd, 22R, 5spd, 270K miles, 4Runner buckets, currently two colors Last edited by Asha'man; 12-09-2007 at 09:51 AM.

12-09-2007, 11:09 AM	#36 (permalink)
Turbo4Runner Registered User Join Date: Nov 2006 Location: Denver, Co Posts: 254	Megasquirt is great. Much better than any piggy back stuff. Don't get me wrong, it takes a bit more time, but I think the end result is worth it. I'm running it as a speed density system so I don't have a MAF too. I really like it. __________________ -Ben '87 4Runner, Turbo'd 22RE, CT26 @ 15psi, Worked Head/Cam/Valves, FMIC, 450cc injectors, MegaSquirt, SS IFS Truss, Manual Hub swap, 4.88 gears, Rear ARB, Front TruTrack, OME Shocks/Leafs, 1.5" BJ Spacers, 33" TrXus on black ProComp wheels.

12-09-2007, 09:47 PM	#37 (permalink)
tc Contributing Member Join Date: Nov 2005 Location: Longmont, CO Posts: 8,327	Any forced induction method will flatten out your torque curve. __________________ Check out www.coTTORA.org to hook up with great Toyota 'wheelin' folks! Current - 93 4Runner: 3VZ 33"x10.50" no lift ARB F/R 96 Impala SS: My own personal cop car Previous - 89 2WD Pickup 22R, Fabtech "Ivan Dan" lift, 31x10.50, IASCA World Finals 4th Place Stop with the mods and get on the trail! Pix at www.4wheelingoh.shutterfly.com/action

12-10-2007, 08:06 AM	#39 (permalink)
j-man Registered User Join Date: Feb 2007 Location: Santa Monica, Ca Posts: 205	"Not to mention the vacume lines associated with turbochargers can also sustain damage, or become brittle and crack." Dude, do you know how a turbocharged vehicle is built? I suggtest you look at some turbocharged engines and youll see that all the "the vacuum lines" are in the engine bay like a stock motor - why would they become brittle and crack? "Im not saying that you cant have a very successful turbo on an offroad vehicle. But you have to think about how many people are really going to have the technical knowledge to create a powerful, fast spooling, and durable turbo setup, compared to the majority of people who can still get power from a supercharger, not have to worry about the complicated stuff, and bolt it on themselves in their garage." Well if you want to just "bolt on the supercharger" and run, your going to have motor damage wether you like it or not eventually. Any time you have forced induction on a stock motor (more air), you have to compensate by adding more fuel which requires a piggyback computer or the like. And to get it to run right after doing that is not just your simple "bolt on" addition. It requires a lot of tuning, and requires cutting in to your vehicles wiring harness which most people are scared to do. So to reply to your statement that a supercharger is easier to bolt on and go compared to a turbo system, id say that anyone who is desires to get more power out of their vehicle should know how both systems work and choose the system that outperforms the other one for power and efficency, because its power that your after, right? If it's the design and construction of a turbo system thats too complicated for home fabrication, you can buy a kit from STS Turbo Systems thats a few hundred dollars more than a blower for tacomas, slightly modify it for 4runners, as well a universal kit for any car that can be tweeked for individual needs. __________________ 2000 4Runner v6 sr5 4x4 5spd: Turbo'ed 99 4Runner v6 Sr5 4x4 5spd: Saw's / OME combo TrueTrac rear 98 4Runner V6 Sr5 4x4 5spd E-locker: Saws / OME combo... EEZI AWN Roof Tent 1.4m 97 4Runner V6 Sr5 4x4 Auto: Saws / OME combo TrueTrac rear 2003 Landcruiser 285 BFG At's and outback roofrack My Baja Trailer Build: http://forum.ih8mud.com/showthread.php?t=179520 http://community.webshots.com/user/bajaroadtrain

12-10-2007, 08:45 AM	#40 (permalink)
grayguy Registered User Join Date: Sep 2007 Location: Duluth MN Posts: 80	To me it comes down to price. I bought the turbo on my car for $150...basically, the cheapest belt driven superchargers are $1000-2000. If I spent that much on a turbo, I would basically have as amazing, top of the line unit. __________________ 89' 22RE 5spd. (Daily/pizza beater) 87' SR5 4runner (Soon to be DD/Trail rig)

12-10-2007, 08:49 AM	#41 (permalink)
Turbo4Runner Registered User Join Date: Nov 2006 Location: Denver, Co Posts: 254	If your intake deep in mud you have a lot of stuff you need to be paying attention to, not just your turbo. How many of us intentionally go into mud as deep as our intake? I'm guessing not that many. If you do visit that deep of mud frequently, you should probably be building your rig as such and protecting your turbo is just one of the MANY things you need to protect. Asha'man had a good point; It's typically easier to package a turbo system in an engine bay with an inline motor, where a roots style blower fits very nicely between the heads of a V motor. FWIW This the second vehicle I have done a fully custom turbo setup on and I have no welder nor do I know how to weld. It's really not that hard, it just takes longer then a weekend and yeah there probably aren't any instructions for you to follow... Is it more complex? Yes, it has more moving parts there for its a more complex system. Is it worth it? That's for you to decide. For me, underpowered vehicles really frustrate me. The first time I drove a 22RE powered truck (before I knew the turbo's existed) I was so torn. Loved the truck but was very frustrated by the lack of power. Turbo's made these Toyota pickups/4Runners the ultimate trucks, for me. __________________ -Ben '87 4Runner, Turbo'd 22RE, CT26 @ 15psi, Worked Head/Cam/Valves, FMIC, 450cc injectors, MegaSquirt, SS IFS Truss, Manual Hub swap, 4.88 gears, Rear ARB, Front TruTrack, OME Shocks/Leafs, 1.5" BJ Spacers, 33" TrXus on black ProComp wheels.

12-10-2007, 08:55 PM	#44 (permalink)
Turbo4Runner Registered User Join Date: Nov 2006 Location: Denver, Co Posts: 254	Thanks.. It's a lot of fun... I'm at Alameda and I25ish.. __________________ -Ben '87 4Runner, Turbo'd 22RE, CT26 @ 15psi, Worked Head/Cam/Valves, FMIC, 450cc injectors, MegaSquirt, SS IFS Truss, Manual Hub swap, 4.88 gears, Rear ARB, Front TruTrack, OME Shocks/Leafs, 1.5" BJ Spacers, 33" TrXus on black ProComp wheels.

12-10-2007, 08:59 PM	#45 (permalink)
Asha'man Registered User Join Date: Jan 2006 Location: Centennial, CO Posts: 870	Nice, that's pretty close to me (Arapahoe and I25ish). We should drink a beer sometime. __________________ --Brian Truck - 1986 4Runner SR5 - 22RE, 5spd, 265K, 3" OME/BJ spacer lift, 31x10.50 TrXus MT's, satin black AR steelies, homemade bikini top Car - 1995 Lexus SC400, red/black, 220K, coilovers, exhaust Pickup - 1985 Toyota Xtra cab pickup - 2wd, 22R, 5spd, 270K miles, 4Runner buckets, currently two colors

12-14-2007, 10:06 PM	#47 (permalink)
ernest t bass Registered User Join Date: May 2007 Location: Point Loma, California Posts: 141	turbos are fun our volvo 850 turbo 1997 is such a sweet ride. fast - 0 to 60 in 7 sec flat top end is 135 miles per hour governed due to the tires. oh and it gets 24 on the hwy, 21 around town. 18 mpg if you drive like a nut. 1984 kawasaki gpz 750 turbo - flat below 4000 rpm then HOLD ON. most awesome car ever driven 1978 Porsche 930 turbo - no car id rather have. __________________ if a duck stands still, you can catch him by the bill

12-15-2007, 11:35 AM	#49 (permalink)
paddlenbike Registered User Join Date: Jul 2002 Location: Sacramento, CA Posts: 1,051	I very much prefer turbos to superchargers. I like the fact that turbos are load-dependent, not engine speed-driven, the wastegate governs the boost without regard to elevation changes, no parasitic drag like a belt-driven supercharger, and most importantly, turbos sound awesome! Here's mine on the dyno with the turbo screaming away. Despite the large turbo, you'll note how quickly the boost jumps to 15 psi and stays there in this video. __________________ 2000 4Runner SR5 V6 4WD \| 5-speed \| E-locker \| Tundra/OME lift \| Stubbs Sliders \| Deckplate/TrueFlow \| Yakima rack \| Click here for specs & pics

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version Email this Page	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
How hard would it be to...	Island_Yota	Pre 84 Trucks	9	09-03-2007 04:53 PM
This shouldn't be so hard!!!	old4runner	86-95 Trucks & 4Runners	13	03-20-2007 11:05 AM
Is it really this hard?	oly884	Off Topic Talk	21	01-30-2007 11:26 PM
How hard.....	93toyotasr5	95.5-2004 Tacomas & 96-2002 4Runners	8	02-23-2005 05:05 PM
How hard???	Stump1883	Offroad Tech	6	02-14-2004 09:39 AM