View Poll Results: Supercharger or Turbo?
Turbo
48
54.55%
Supercharger
40
45.45%
Voters: 88. You may not vote on this poll
Supercharger or Turbo?
10-29-2002, 03:01 PM
#1
Contributing Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Peoria, AZ
Posts: 1,079
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Supercharger or Turbo?
Heyy everyone, wanted to get a quick poll going. Seeing as there is limited options for performance mods on our rigs we will be working on a Twin Turbo bolt on setup for the V6 and a single turbo for the 4 cyclinder. Turbos will include the following:
* Turbo (550-600 hp possible with this kit, of course other engine modifications would be necessary to run this much HP)
* Intercooler
* Down Pipes
* Blow Off Valve
* All hardware
The Twin Turbo setup would run approx $3300 while the Single would run about $2600
With that in mind, what would you rather choose?? Supercharger or Turbo?
* Turbo (550-600 hp possible with this kit, of course other engine modifications would be necessary to run this much HP)
* Intercooler
* Down Pipes
* Blow Off Valve
* All hardware
The Twin Turbo setup would run approx $3300 while the Single would run about $2600
With that in mind, what would you rather choose?? Supercharger or Turbo?
10-29-2002, 03:23 PM
#2
Registered User
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: maine
Posts: 712
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
a twin turbo kit for the guys with V6's would be sweet. i'd even consider it for my 2.7. but i havnt even begun to look into this... but for the 4cyl i might be better off with a SC then a single turbo. turbo's look cooler tough!!!
10-29-2002, 05:11 PM
#4
Registered User
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Big Bear or Tahoe
Posts: 395
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Don't forget better pistons, more powerful ignition, stand alone engine management, or a butt load of piggy back electrical upgrades, upgraded fuel system, testing and tuning. It will cost a lot to get that much power and have it be reliable. SC would probably be a better choice.
10-29-2002, 05:56 PM
#5
Contributing Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Peoria, AZ
Posts: 1,079
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thank you everyone for your post...as I cannot release a ton of information regarding these systems, here is a little more of what the kit will come with. In the next week or so, I am planning a design session to go over some of the finer details. Nothing will be released until full dyno testing is done and the system performs as it should. I appreciate everyones concerns, and they will be addressed at this meeting. Below is a more complete list of the kit:
Stainless Steel Manifold
Stainless Steel Downpipe (with flexpipe)
Intercooler (20" x 3" x 8") approx
Piping Kit
WasteGate
Blow Off Valve
Garrett turbo
Stainless Oil Feed and Rubber Return
Piping couplers, clamps, hardware, etc.
We will have to investigate further as to any changes that would need to be required to run just a 100hp system. Like I had mentioned previously in the post, this system can work up to 550-600hp, of course there are going to be several things that would need to be done to ensure proper engine reliability.
Stainless Steel Manifold
Stainless Steel Downpipe (with flexpipe)
Intercooler (20" x 3" x 8") approx
Piping Kit
WasteGate
Blow Off Valve
Garrett turbo
Stainless Oil Feed and Rubber Return
Piping couplers, clamps, hardware, etc.
We will have to investigate further as to any changes that would need to be required to run just a 100hp system. Like I had mentioned previously in the post, this system can work up to 550-600hp, of course there are going to be several things that would need to be done to ensure proper engine reliability.
10-29-2002, 05:59 PM
#6
Contributing Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Peoria, AZ
Posts: 1,079
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally posted by naksukow
Don't forget better pistons, more powerful ignition, stand alone engine management, or a butt load of piggy back electrical upgrades, upgraded fuel system, testing and tuning. It will cost a lot to get that much power and have it be reliable. SC would probably be a better choice.
Don't forget better pistons, more powerful ignition, stand alone engine management, or a butt load of piggy back electrical upgrades, upgraded fuel system, testing and tuning. It will cost a lot to get that much power and have it be reliable. SC would probably be a better choice.
LOL we have a kit for that too 
Mike
10-29-2002, 07:26 PM
#7
Contributing Member
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Wallingford, Ct
Posts: 1,594
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
No doubt that a turbo would be lots more fun than a supercharger...
That having been said, a supercharger better suits my needs. It's smoother power delivery is much more usable off-road and for towing my boat. I need power throughout the rev range, not just above 3000 rpm's.
That having been said, a supercharger better suits my needs. It's smoother power delivery is much more usable off-road and for towing my boat. I need power throughout the rev range, not just above 3000 rpm's.
Trending Topics
10-29-2002, 10:30 PM
#8
Registered User
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: San Diego
Posts: 470
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
IMO a Supercharger would be best for offroading and towing with lots of low end torque. Like tomus1000 mentioned above, I also think it is easier on the engine and provides a smoother transition of power.
I would like to see a design that TRD should have done in the first place ... a supercharger with output capable to an Eaton M90, ported to an intercooler and a nice clean way to install it.
Since you can get a rebuilt M90 for $700 or less this could keep the cost well under TRD's and then you could be a formidable player in the performance market.
Lets face it, what are you going to go for? A less than adequate TRD Supercharger for $2500 (I think the TRD S/C is really taxed to the limit for the 3.4L) or a more powerful Supercharger with an intercooler for $1500?
I think you could probably sell more units this way as well. Cost is the biggest factor or everybody would be running a TRD Supercharger. About 95% or more 4Runners don't have the TRD unit mostly because of cost, so if they are not spending $2500 for the TRD S/C how are they going to come up with $3300 for the TT?
Just my .02
Cheers
I would like to see a design that TRD should have done in the first place ... a supercharger with output capable to an Eaton M90, ported to an intercooler and a nice clean way to install it.
Since you can get a rebuilt M90 for $700 or less this could keep the cost well under TRD's and then you could be a formidable player in the performance market.
Lets face it, what are you going to go for? A less than adequate TRD Supercharger for $2500 (I think the TRD S/C is really taxed to the limit for the 3.4L) or a more powerful Supercharger with an intercooler for $1500?
I think you could probably sell more units this way as well. Cost is the biggest factor or everybody would be running a TRD Supercharger. About 95% or more 4Runners don't have the TRD unit mostly because of cost, so if they are not spending $2500 for the TRD S/C how are they going to come up with $3300 for the TT?
Just my .02
Cheers
10-30-2002, 09:13 AM
#9
Away
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Beaverton, OR
Posts: 1,588
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally posted by Beowulf
IMO a Supercharger would be best for offroading and towing with lots of low end torque. Like tomus1000 mentioned above, I also think it is easier on the engine and provides a smoother transition of power.
I would like to see a design that TRD should have done in the first place ... a supercharger with output capable to an Eaton M90, ported to an intercooler and a nice clean way to install it.
Since you can get a rebuilt M90 for $700 or less this could keep the cost well under TRD's and then you could be a formidable player in the performance market.
Lets face it, what are you going to go for? A less than adequate TRD Supercharger for $2500 (I think the TRD S/C is really taxed to the limit for the 3.4L) or a more powerful Supercharger with an intercooler for $1500?
I think you could probably sell more units this way as well. Cost is the biggest factor or everybody would be running a TRD Supercharger. About 95% or more 4Runners don't have the TRD unit mostly because of cost, so if they are not spending $2500 for the TRD S/C how are they going to come up with $3300 for the TT?
Just my .02
Cheers
IMO a Supercharger would be best for offroading and towing with lots of low end torque. Like tomus1000 mentioned above, I also think it is easier on the engine and provides a smoother transition of power.
I would like to see a design that TRD should have done in the first place ... a supercharger with output capable to an Eaton M90, ported to an intercooler and a nice clean way to install it.
Since you can get a rebuilt M90 for $700 or less this could keep the cost well under TRD's and then you could be a formidable player in the performance market.
Lets face it, what are you going to go for? A less than adequate TRD Supercharger for $2500 (I think the TRD S/C is really taxed to the limit for the 3.4L) or a more powerful Supercharger with an intercooler for $1500?
I think you could probably sell more units this way as well. Cost is the biggest factor or everybody would be running a TRD Supercharger. About 95% or more 4Runners don't have the TRD unit mostly because of cost, so if they are not spending $2500 for the TRD S/C how are they going to come up with $3300 for the TT?
Just my .02
Cheers
A TT setup seems kinda dumb for an Off-Road vehicle.
IMHO
Dr. Z
10-30-2002, 09:44 AM
#10
Registered User
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: San Diego
Posts: 470
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally posted by Dr. Zhivago
I 2nd that Beowulf! Good post and flawless logic!
A TT setup seems kinda dumb for an Off-Road vehicle.
IMHO
Dr. Z
I 2nd that Beowulf! Good post and flawless logic!
A TT setup seems kinda dumb for an Off-Road vehicle.
IMHO
Dr. Z
... See Mike you have 2 prospects already for the S/C Intercooler set up! 
Don't forget to leave hook ups for the Aquamist system
10-30-2002, 05:56 PM
#12
Registered User
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Kent, Washington
Posts: 643
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Beowulf,
Man you hit the nail on the head.
Most of us would be SCed if it weren't for the over priced cost. I just can't justify the price of the SC when my rig runs fine now. I know it would be a blast to have one but there hasn't been a time where I've said, "Man if only I had a SC I would have been able to.......".
I've been told that Im missing out by not having a SC. But till TRD lowers the price (yea, fat chance in hell) or some other company such as Eaton starts selling them for a reasonable price, I guess I won't ever know (except when my nephew shows up with his 2000 Ford lightning staged II). he he
Man you hit the nail on the head.
Most of us would be SCed if it weren't for the over priced cost. I just can't justify the price of the SC when my rig runs fine now. I know it would be a blast to have one but there hasn't been a time where I've said, "Man if only I had a SC I would have been able to.......".
I've been told that Im missing out by not having a SC. But till TRD lowers the price (yea, fat chance in hell) or some other company such as Eaton starts selling them for a reasonable price, I guess I won't ever know (except when my nephew shows up with his 2000 Ford lightning staged II). he he
10-31-2002, 11:08 AM
#13
Contributing Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Peoria, AZ
Posts: 1,079
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
HI there guys, just wanted to share a little more information with you. For those of you who are favoring the S/C due to the low end power you receive, that same power (and more) can be produced just the same with a Turbo. If you would like a kit that produces full boost at 2500 rpm, then that can be done. Some of the new ball bearing turbos can even offer more options.
As far as more or less strain on an engine...actually you put more strain on the motor with a S/C vs a Turbo due to the fact that the motor has to run harder in order to provide its boost. Remember with a S/C it take horsepower to make horsepower.
These kits will be custamizable, some may want the higher H/P kits, others may want the standard kit (100 or so HP)
And for some of those people who just have to have that "blowoff" sound...we have things taken care of for you as well.
Anyhow, things will be a little slow in development for the next week as SEMA is coming around. I will be sure to provide updates as I receive them.
Have a safe holiday!!
Mike
As far as more or less strain on an engine...actually you put more strain on the motor with a S/C vs a Turbo due to the fact that the motor has to run harder in order to provide its boost. Remember with a S/C it take horsepower to make horsepower.
These kits will be custamizable, some may want the higher H/P kits, others may want the standard kit (100 or so HP)
And for some of those people who just have to have that "blowoff" sound...we have things taken care of for you as well.
Anyhow, things will be a little slow in development for the next week as SEMA is coming around. I will be sure to provide updates as I receive them.
Have a safe holiday!!
Mike
06-03-2003, 04:26 AM
#14
Registered User
Anything for the 3.slow? Granted my 224,000 mile old engine probably wouldn't like forced induction that much....lol
My vote goes turbo, while I love the screaming sound a blower makes, I love the wastegate blowoff sound more....
My vote goes turbo, while I love the screaming sound a blower makes, I love the wastegate blowoff sound more....
06-03-2003, 07:48 AM
#16
Contributing Member
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Brooklyn, NY
Posts: 4,868
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Yeah, what happened to this mike? Any updates? I completely agree with mike on the strain thing. Espcially if you get an electronic boost controller. With a turbo, you can adjust the boost on the fly. With an S/C you have to change gearing. So with a turbo, you can set the boost to virtually nothing until you need the extra oomph. But even without, thats the whole principal of a turbo. When you don't need it, it doesn't force any extra air in. So unlike a superchagrer when you cruz'n on the highway its not doing a thing (ie not adding strain sucking extra fuel or adding extra heat). A supercharger on the other hand is always on. Whether you on or off the gas. And about the not having power til 3000rpm, we are not supras with huge turbos running crazy amounts of boost. The smaller the turbo the less the lag and quicker the power. Go test drive a new saab, you can't even tell it has a turbo. Towing, I dissagree completely when was the last time you didn't hear a turbo whine comming from a semi truck?? Off-roading, you have a point there, but again, its not like we are going to get a rush of 100hp if you are barely on the gas. You only get the turbo "surge" when you romp on it. It will only spool as much as you lay into it. Are the intercoolers front mount?? :drool: (dangit I'm still are waiting for the drool smiley!! )
)
06-03-2003, 12:25 PM
#18
Contributing Member
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 10,916
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally posted by turboale
Towing, I dissagree completely when was the last time you didn't hear a turbo whine comming from a semi truck?? Off-roading, you have a point there, but again, its not like we are going to get a rush of 100hp if you are barely on the gas. You only get the turbo "surge" when you romp on it. It will only spool as much as you lay into it. Are the intercoolers front mount?? :drool: (dangit I'm still are waiting for the drool smiley!! )
Towing, I dissagree completely when was the last time you didn't hear a turbo whine comming from a semi truck?? Off-roading, you have a point there, but again, its not like we are going to get a rush of 100hp if you are barely on the gas. You only get the turbo "surge" when you romp on it. It will only spool as much as you lay into it. Are the intercoolers front mount?? :drool: (dangit I'm still are waiting for the drool smiley!!
)
I know where you were going and what you meant with this...however lets not forget we are dealing with diesels when speaking of semi-trucks and turbocharging. I dont need to go into the physics and differences behind diesels and gasoline engines. But, on the 3.4, a SC would be better for towing unless you used a single small turbo which would spool quickly. Not only that, but the original thread was asking about a twin turbo kit. A twin turbo kit would be quite taxing on the scavenging of exhaust gasses, therefore I believe "towability" would suffer.
Not flaming or even disagreeing with you necessarily, just adding to the list of many things to think about.
[edit: My bad, I just read the thread more carefully and saw it mentioned a single turbo option also]
Last edited by rimpainter.com; 06-03-2003 at 12:26 PM.
