NA Superchargers Or Turbos

[®™▪▪Å�чÑ�ίÂ]

I just wanted to see wat ppl like more
NA = Good Speed Avrage Accel Long engine Life
Superchargers = Good Speed Excellen Accel Not a very high engine life
Turbos = Good speed really good accel, turbo lag(not F40 that jus goez)

So peeps watll it be

[jon_s]

In an ideal world, I would like a powerful N/A car. It is the purest you can get. However, I have no problem with superchargers, or Turbos!

[SPEEDKILLAR]

N/A, but I also woudn't mind (Merc AMG has a long engine life) supercharged
:wink:

[TT]

No problem with supercharger or turbos, but I'd take an NA engine anyday :D

[coloradosilver]

I really think it depends on the engine. For the bigger engines, I'd rather have a supercharger, hence, I have one one my car. For the smaller four cylinder cars, a turbo will be more practical. Also depends on the application. My Ideal car is the Koenigsegg CC. Big, powerful engine, with the supercharger. I'd love to get my hands on one. :mrgreen:

[pagani]

I have voted for turbo's because you can gain lots of hp with turbo's and the turbo lag is not two bad anymore with the new turbo tech .
:twisted: :P

[drift*r2xs]

With the right turbo there is almost no lag. To many people think bigger is always better. It is not true you have to pick the turbo right for your engine an what you plan on doing with it. the bigger the turbo the more lag, unless you adjust the turbine trim to match your application. you can find turbos that match an engine to give it power all the way through the power band. 8) 8) :twisted:

[redracer]

Turbo for me is the way to go !! I have a Cosworth engine and will be fitting it to my car, can you believe that the Cosworth engine is tuned to around 800bhp in Enland for indoor rally cross and this only from a 4 cylinder ??
:mrgreen:

[novass]

I like Naturally Aspirated, turbo and supercharger.
but i prefer Naturally Aspirated......

[StanAE86]

NA = Good Speed Avrage Accel Long engine Life
Superchargers = Good Speed Excellen Accel Not a very high engine life
Turbos = Good speed really good accel, turbo lag(not F40 that jus goez)


That is a tad bit of an overgeneralization. McLaren's F1 has damn good speed and acceleration and it's n/a.

The bigger debate is between superchargers and turbos - and that argument has been going on for ages. I'd choose a good n/a motor over a force fed motor, anyday.

[DeMoN]

n/a just because the McLaren uses one. Being the fastest car, NA must be the way! (The reason for n/a was given on a documentary of the McLaren)

[callen]

NA. two words. Enzo. Mclaren.

[Gnome]

Turbos are great!
My main reason for using a turbo is that you can get more torque at lower revs. You don't have to shift down that often if you have more low rev torque.
Look at this stock Saab engine. One thing is that 350 Nm is a lot, but it's at max level already at 1900rpm and stays flat! Try that with NA...
http://www.oshit.org/upload/store/Saab9-5AeroTorqueCurve.jpg

As mentioned you get lots of power from a small engine. This leads to one point that seldom comes up in this forum: Fuel economy! If you push a turbocharged engine it is thirsty as an equivalently powerful NA engine, but if you drive softer it virtually runs on air.

[aliendude012]

It really depends on the application. A nice powerful, torquey n/a motor is great for day to day driving. Having a decent amount of power across the spectrum without worry of lag or reliablility is great for (aggressive) driving. In a road-racing environment, too much power isn't necessary, so a nice smaller turbo with little lag, or a supercharger is good. You need the immediate power to pull yourself out of a turn. In a *gulp* dragrace application anything goes. the point is the most power you can connect to the ground. heavy-breathing superchargers, a big turbo fed by a small turbo, 1000hp worth of nitrous oxide, etc.

And as for superchargers being unreliable, that depends on the construction and the intentions. Something like the Kompressor mercedes uses was intended from the beginning, and it lasts as long as an n/a engine would. but if you throw a big honkin' blower onto a Merlin 632, that engine won't go more than a couple of passes before it needs to be rebuilt or replaced.

[Chingachgook]

I don't have problems with Turbos (give me and F40,or even a Noble 3R) or supercharger (mmhh Koenigsegg CCR) but in the ideal world, an N/A engine is the one I love most. Great sound, instant response from low to sky-high revs and the screaming at 9000rpm is something intoxicating

[corvette97]

i NA, but only if its big and powerfull, like a corvette, a Turbo in case of a 2.0 4-banger,

[Garretts_turbo]

i'm goin for the turbo. im a sucker for the turbo spool and the loud blowoff. a turbo was the only reason i ever considered driving a VW beetle turbo S. lovely little performer, too bad its a beetle..... :x
supercharged v-8s are nice too, though.

[Evo]

Turbo all the way.. That turbo pull never get's old to me..
Lag problem..can be easily solved as Brembo pointed out.. Or maybe you need an Anti-Lag switch but be really for the bom bom bom.. :D
N/A is not bad.. but needs a lot more work to get huge HP gains from it.

[bmagni]

natural asrpirated all the way, its like girls with boob jobs, nothing feels better than the normal ones

[Akmon]

I love the McLaren
It's NA, right?
It's the best, right?

[oscargarza88]

I have voted for turbo's because you can gain lots of hp with turbo's and the turbo lag is not two bad anymore with the new turbo tech .
:twisted: :P
me 2, its an easy way to gain hp, but some people say its gay, cause they have this big v8s and a turbo 4 cilinder turbo can beat them

[RC45]

me 2, its an easy way to gain hp, but some people say its gay, cause they have this big v8s and a turbo 4 cilinder turbo can beat them

So - you're in Houston - care to bring one of these street turbo 4 cylinders to tangle with one of the many 427 and 434ci N/A 530rwhp V8's in town?

530rwhp is 620 crank HP

[spicymustard]

Akmon wrote:

I love the McLaren FAIR ENOUGH.
It's NA, right? YES.
It's the best, right? NO.


The McLaren is the best!!!
It might not be the fastest track car, but i would say, and im sure many will agree and disagree with me that it is the best car package!!! And the NA BMW engine is pretty damn impressive even in todays standards.

oh and if you want the greatest track star, just get the LM version

[oldsnail]

I just wanted to see wat ppl like more
NA = Good Speed Avrage Accel Long engine Life
Superchargers = Good Speed Excellen Accel Not a very high engine life
Turbos = Good speed really good accel, turbo lag(not F40 that jus goez)

So peeps watll it be

i dont think superchargers have short engine life if a car is properly taken car.
my friend has a 88 MR2 SC, and it has over 300 000k's on it..

[kteo2003]

i like all type of engines......can i have all of them in one car???????