Turbocharger or Supercharger????
Thread Starter
Joined: Sep 2005
Posts: 2
Turbocharger or Supercharger????
I am DEFINETLY going to do either or VERY soon!!! I was wondering if ANYONE at all can help me out here. I would like to know what would be better for my 2002 Mitsubishi Eclipse GT. A Turbocharger (the one from www.tearstone.com) or a Supercharger? What are the pros and cons of both? Which one will give me the most horsepower? I dont care about prices! Just plain and simple....WHICH IS BETTER?????
Senior Member
Joined: Sep 2005
Posts: 862
RE: Turbocharger or Supercharger????
it is completely a personal preference. some people will tell you that a turbo is better, some will tell you that a supercharger is better. both have pros and cons. you will not go wrong with either one that you choose.
with that being said, the turbo will give you the most power when running the same psi.
for my personal preference, i'd go turbo.
with that being said, the turbo will give you the most power when running the same psi.
for my personal preference, i'd go turbo.
Senior Member
Joined: Sep 2005
Posts: 862
RE: Turbocharger or Supercharger????
ORIGINAL: TheAdvocate
I dont know much about those 3g's but how are the motors after putting a turbo on them? Are they tough enuf to handle a big turbo stock, or do you have to beef em up?
I dont know much about those 3g's but how are the motors after putting a turbo on them? Are they tough enuf to handle a big turbo stock, or do you have to beef em up?
Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 2
RE: Turbocharger or Supercharger????
Honestly its all what you want, a turbo will give you a better higher end power but will also give you lag (a ball bearing turbo dose only so much) and a supercharger will give you power from the bottom end, I would honestly go with supercharger, you dont need to be scared of over heating so bad and may give you better driveability, and there much easier to decide, with a turbo you need the perfect size or your bogging or it will spool to soon
Senior Member
Joined: May 2005
Posts: 12,084
RE: Turbocharger or Supercharger????
eipp modds kits look nice but do a little research with all the problem it has. for one the way they use the MAF is all wrong and I have heard nothing but bad things about the black box and grey box that they use. I was once set on buying from ripps but reseached a little and changed my mind. The turbo kit is much easier to upgrade you can run higher boost at the push of a button where as the SDS youll need a new pulley kit every time and like said before the turbo will make more power at the same PSI as a SDS kit.
Plus the turbo it is almost a install and forget thing the SDS you use water\meth to cool the charge (it is non intercooled) if you dont pay attention to that your motor is gonzo you gotta make sure you dont run out.
Plus the turbo it is almost a install and forget thing the SDS you use water\meth to cool the charge (it is non intercooled) if you dont pay attention to that your motor is gonzo you gotta make sure you dont run out.
Senior Member
Joined: May 2005
Posts: 12,084
RE: Turbocharger or Supercharger????
and low end power isnot something needed on the 6G72 3G you will spin your tires for a week trying to race. the lag will help that a bit. the SDS runs hot to but its coolded like I said with a spray mix the turbo it easily intercooled which to me is much safer since some people dont know that water\meth will run out unless you fill it then your talking $$ to keep it running great.
Senior Member
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 2,337
RE: Turbocharger or Supercharger????
PErsonally I would take a turbo over a charger any day. 2 of my close friends have chargers. MY best friend has a 02 lightning with a root style on it, and A guy I work with who lives down the street has a vortech cintrifical charger on his 2000 ss. Both of the cars are scary fast. The lightning runs a 12.8 and ss runs a low 10. But now lots of people are taking the s/c off the lightnings and throwing on turbos. Just to give you an idea a stock lightning rus at 10 lbs of boost and makes 380(2002 that is). With a turbo on the same motor, same fuel system, same exaust, running 8lbs the truck makes 450hp. with the SS LS1's with turbos running 12 lbs of boost are pushing 600hp(590) where My friend with his charger on 12 lbs of boost(he had a custom upper pully made the stock pully only went to 8lbs) he only made 540.
turbos have a much high peek Hp compaired to chargers, are less rotational mass on the motor, and are much easy to controle psi wise. For a turbo you need to change a spring or get a boost controler. For a S/C you need a different pulley to controle the boost setting on a root style and on the cintrifical charger you need an adjustable surge valve which can run around 400 bucks and dosent work on all chargers.
In light of that Info I favor turbos over chargers.
turbos have a much high peek Hp compaired to chargers, are less rotational mass on the motor, and are much easy to controle psi wise. For a turbo you need to change a spring or get a boost controler. For a S/C you need a different pulley to controle the boost setting on a root style and on the cintrifical charger you need an adjustable surge valve which can run around 400 bucks and dosent work on all chargers.
In light of that Info I favor turbos over chargers.
Senior Member
Joined: Sep 2005
Posts: 862
RE: Turbocharger or Supercharger????
ORIGINAL: slow420a
PErsonally I would take a turbo over a charger any day. 2 of my close friends have chargers. MY best friend has a 02 lightning with a root style on it, and A guy I work with who lives down the street has a vortech cintrifical charger on his 2000 ss. Both of the cars are scary fast. The lightning runs a 12.8 and ss runs a low 10. But now lots of people are taking the s/c off the lightnings and throwing on turbos. Just to give you an idea a stock lightning rus at 10 lbs of boost and makes 380(2002 that is). With a turbo on the same motor, same fuel system, same exaust, running 8lbs the truck makes 450hp. with the SS LS1's with turbos running 12 lbs of boost are pushing 600hp(590) where My friend with his charger on 12 lbs of boost(he had a custom upper pully made the stock pully only went to 8lbs) he only made 540.
turbos have a much high peek Hp compaired to chargers, are less rotational mass on the motor, and are much easy to controle psi wise. For a turbo you need to change a spring or get a boost controler. For a S/C you need a different pulley to controle the boost setting on a root style and on the cintrifical charger you need an adjustable surge valve which can run around 400 bucks and dosent work on all chargers.
In light of that Info I favor turbos over chargers.
PErsonally I would take a turbo over a charger any day. 2 of my close friends have chargers. MY best friend has a 02 lightning with a root style on it, and A guy I work with who lives down the street has a vortech cintrifical charger on his 2000 ss. Both of the cars are scary fast. The lightning runs a 12.8 and ss runs a low 10. But now lots of people are taking the s/c off the lightnings and throwing on turbos. Just to give you an idea a stock lightning rus at 10 lbs of boost and makes 380(2002 that is). With a turbo on the same motor, same fuel system, same exaust, running 8lbs the truck makes 450hp. with the SS LS1's with turbos running 12 lbs of boost are pushing 600hp(590) where My friend with his charger on 12 lbs of boost(he had a custom upper pully made the stock pully only went to 8lbs) he only made 540.
turbos have a much high peek Hp compaired to chargers, are less rotational mass on the motor, and are much easy to controle psi wise. For a turbo you need to change a spring or get a boost controler. For a S/C you need a different pulley to controle the boost setting on a root style and on the cintrifical charger you need an adjustable surge valve which can run around 400 bucks and dosent work on all chargers.
In light of that Info I favor turbos over chargers.
