Trend towards NA or supercharger vs turbo
07-15-2010, 09:53 PM
#1
Melting Slicks
Thread Starter
Trend towards NA or supercharger vs turbo
A few years back the trend seemed to be turbochargers, for those that could afford it. Lately it seems that there is little hype promoting turbo's and those who are upgrading seem to be opting for 427 or larger NA builds, or just installing a supercharger kit, and calling it a day. I was wondering why there has been this shift in thinking. (Or is it just my perception of things?)
The things that come to mind, are:
The price of a 427 engine has come down significantly.
Modifications to the supercharger kits have have made them more reliable, especially as related to belt slippage issues.
Have the turbochargers not kept up with price and performance improvements seen in the other two? Do they have reliablity issues, or high maintenance costs that have made people seek a different path to performance? Also there seems to be fewer options these days when choosing a turbo system.
Don't get me wrong. I would love to have any of the three, done right.
I don't want this to turn into a "I have XYZ system, and it's the best." thread.
The things that come to mind, are:
The price of a 427 engine has come down significantly.
Modifications to the supercharger kits have have made them more reliable, especially as related to belt slippage issues.
Have the turbochargers not kept up with price and performance improvements seen in the other two? Do they have reliablity issues, or high maintenance costs that have made people seek a different path to performance? Also there seems to be fewer options these days when choosing a turbo system.
Don't get me wrong. I would love to have any of the three, done right.
I don't want this to turn into a "I have XYZ system, and it's the best." thread.
07-15-2010, 10:01 PM
#2
Le Mans Master
for the last year i have been running n/a and i just purchaced a twin turbo for more power and will update ya once i get it and have it installed 
Rick
Rick
07-15-2010, 10:02 PM
#3
Melting Slicks
I am all ears for this i would really love to know. i really want a NA build because i love the true beauty of a nice well built engine, but i also love the fact of being blown and having that jet car sound. im also thinking about going nitro because it is so cheap.
07-15-2010, 10:30 PM
#4
Race Director
Member Since: Jan 2001
Location: P-town Baby! Virginia
Posts: 14,990
Received 307 Likes
on
290 Posts
I don't think much has changed....S/C is a solid route to go to be quick for a reasonable price. Some people are purists or just want a built motor (not that building a motor has come down much in price) and TT is still a great way to go...but more costly than S/C. I think it's all in what you like, what your wallet will support, what the use is...etc.
07-15-2010, 10:38 PM
#5
Le Mans Master
I don't think much has changed....S/C is a solid route to go to be quick for a reasonable price. Some people are purists or just want a built motor (not that building a motor has come down much in price) and TT is still a great way to go...but more costly than S/C. I think it's all in what you like, what your wallet will support, what the use is...etc.
but now i am doing a very nice audio upgrade and as much as i do love the lope of a cam i am trying to tone down the outside noise so i can enjoy the inside noise which also just so happens gives me more hp and torque 
and doing it much quieter!!! by the way in the next few months or so i will have my ported fast 90 intake,ls2 tb, texas speed torquer 3 cam, tpis headers, and fast injectors and finally my vararam for sale sooooooooooooooo keep a eye out
Rick
07-15-2010, 10:45 PM
#6
Racer
Member Since: Feb 2010
Location: Effingham IL
Posts: 388
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If a person has deep pockets build a forged bottom throw in a turbo cam and a sts twin kit with a good tune its good for well over 700hp. I have a twin turbo stang making 977hp at crank. With that said i plan a maggie for my coupe this fall, I just love the sound and torque it makes for street driving. 
07-16-2010, 05:02 AM
#8
Le Mans Master
Member Since: Jul 2009
Location: Los Angeles California
Posts: 9,526
Likes: 0
Received 10 Likes
on
10 Posts
The biggest reasons not to use a turbo system is because:
A) The majority of the system will not be smog legal in most states. The rear-mounted systems are the only ones that will be because they're after the cats.
B) They're harder to tune.
C) They're more expensive.
Superchargers are far easier to tune and don't cost as much after installation. They're simpler in design and upgrading boost is as simple as changing a pulley. They're not as efficient as a turbo system, but they've definitely come a long way since the old days of power-robbing supercharging systems.
The N/A motors are always going to be the easiest to tune. They don't really have as much potential as a forced induction system, but they can certainly make lots of power for far less money than a forced induction system.
Forced induction is a way of artificially adding displacement. At 1 bar of boost (approx 14.6PSI) you're effectively doubling your motor's displacement. In theory with a 100% efficient system (which none are) you'd double your horse power the motor would normally make at 0 boost. (i.e. a 5.7L motor is the equivalent of an 11.4L motor at 1 bar.)
I'm building an N/A motor because I don't have the money for forced induction and I'd like to keep the added weight to my car down as much as possible. I'm not looking to make a ton of power, and any forced induction system will be overkill for me. But if I wanted to make lots of power N/A, I'd have no choice but to go to a larger displacement motor. 427 is the key cube right now for N/A, but I see many people building 402ci and 408ci motors from 6.0+ blocks. That seems to be the magic number for forced induction as well.
A) The majority of the system will not be smog legal in most states. The rear-mounted systems are the only ones that will be because they're after the cats.
B) They're harder to tune.
C) They're more expensive.
Superchargers are far easier to tune and don't cost as much after installation. They're simpler in design and upgrading boost is as simple as changing a pulley. They're not as efficient as a turbo system, but they've definitely come a long way since the old days of power-robbing supercharging systems.
The N/A motors are always going to be the easiest to tune. They don't really have as much potential as a forced induction system, but they can certainly make lots of power for far less money than a forced induction system.
Forced induction is a way of artificially adding displacement. At 1 bar of boost (approx 14.6PSI) you're effectively doubling your motor's displacement. In theory with a 100% efficient system (which none are) you'd double your horse power the motor would normally make at 0 boost. (i.e. a 5.7L motor is the equivalent of an 11.4L motor at 1 bar.)
I'm building an N/A motor because I don't have the money for forced induction and I'd like to keep the added weight to my car down as much as possible. I'm not looking to make a ton of power, and any forced induction system will be overkill for me. But if I wanted to make lots of power N/A, I'd have no choice but to go to a larger displacement motor. 427 is the key cube right now for N/A, but I see many people building 402ci and 408ci motors from 6.0+ blocks. That seems to be the magic number for forced induction as well.
07-16-2010, 06:32 AM
#9
Le Mans Master
I personally vote for the driveablity issue is why for me and many others went the SC route. I had a head and cam package before this and even with the SD tune it was still a little choppy but that is why you go with a big cam. I have more power than I could ever need or want and it still drives like stock until your foot is in it.
07-16-2010, 06:50 AM
#10
Team Owner
Member Since: Sep 2003
Location: Raleigh / Rolesville NC
Posts: 43,084
Likes: 0
Received 25 Likes
on
25 Posts
A few years back the trend seemed to be turbochargers, for those that could afford it. Lately it seems that there is little hype promoting turbo's and those who are upgrading seem to be opting for 427 or larger NA builds, or just installing a supercharger kit, and calling it a day. I was wondering why there has been this shift in thinking. (Or is it just my perception of things?)
The things that come to mind, are:
The price of a 427 engine has come down significantly.
Modifications to the supercharger kits have have made them more reliable, especially as related to belt slippage issues.
Have the turbochargers not kept up with price and performance improvements seen in the other two? Do they have reliablity issues, or high maintenance costs that have made people seek a different path to performance? Also there seems to be fewer options these days when choosing a turbo system.
Don't get me wrong. I would love to have any of the three, done right.
I don't want this to turn into a "I have XYZ system, and it's the best." thread.
The things that come to mind, are:
The price of a 427 engine has come down significantly.
Modifications to the supercharger kits have have made them more reliable, especially as related to belt slippage issues.
Have the turbochargers not kept up with price and performance improvements seen in the other two? Do they have reliablity issues, or high maintenance costs that have made people seek a different path to performance? Also there seems to be fewer options these days when choosing a turbo system.
Don't get me wrong. I would love to have any of the three, done right.
I don't want this to turn into a "I have XYZ system, and it's the best." thread.
(1) Money, (2) how much is the car used, (3) Reliability and ( 4) more money
then the MINOR part is your engine maintenance. High HP motors take LOTS of maintenance. Dont let anyone fool you, of if some one says no they dont, that person does not drive enough or even hard enough.
Last edited by AU N EGL; 07-16-2010 at 06:52 AM.
07-16-2010, 07:45 AM
#11
Melting Slicks
Member Since: Oct 2007
Location: Holland Landing Ontario
Posts: 2,724
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
What is the shift ? Four things
(1) Money, (2) how much is the car used, (3) Reliability and ( 4) more money
then the MINOR part is your engine maintenance. High HP motors take LOTS of maintenance. Dont let anyone fool you, of if some one says no they dont, that person does not drive enough or even hard enough.
(1) Money, (2) how much is the car used, (3) Reliability and ( 4) more money
then the MINOR part is your engine maintenance. High HP motors take LOTS of maintenance. Dont let anyone fool you, of if some one says no they dont, that person does not drive enough or even hard enough.
And I'll add #5. How the car is used.
My car is stock except intake and exhaust. If I wanted gobs of power for the street I'd supercharge it. Drag racing, I'd do all of the above. For road racing, N/A is the way to go.
07-16-2010, 08:22 AM
#12
Installation
Have just purchased my second STS system and having it installed with confidence of the end result. Joe at St. Pete Auto Aids did the first one and I have had no problems or concerns. This one is going in my 03 Z06 and we'll be adding the right cam and making sure the motor gets the proper amount of gas etc. The key is have a professional do it and put the extras that are needed to have the system preform properly. Am planning to use this car on the track and feel the turbo will give me an advantage. A system is only as good as how it is installed and maintained. Just my two cents.
07-16-2010, 09:19 AM
#13
Melting Slicks
S/C and turbo drastically reduce the longevity of the engine, however turbo does the most damage. i will never do FI. NA all the way for me. i want my car to last a REALLY long time.
07-16-2010, 10:14 AM
#14
Life Time NCM #2196
Today compared to when I built my forged 347 5 years ago is dramitic. The LS2 was just introduced and stroking them was expensive, the stroked LS1/6 blocks to a 383 did not interest me for the little power gains for the $$ spent. I went with a A&A Procharger setup and have been above 700 rwhp for 5 years and have not looked back.
Today you can get a stroked LS2 402 or LS3 418 that rocks or if you want the big boy setups lots of them out there ERL LS2 427 or larger strokers, LSX Blocks 427 to almost 500 cubes to support 2k hp. Now the entry point for the big boys in not the 700 that I have had and not many 5 years ago but 1k, get on the FI sections of C5/6 and lots in this area.
My next build is up in the air as HP is addictive and more is always good, especially for me that has a stocker to drive daily to cure having a Vette to motor around in all the time
Today you can get a stroked LS2 402 or LS3 418 that rocks or if you want the big boy setups lots of them out there ERL LS2 427 or larger strokers, LSX Blocks 427 to almost 500 cubes to support 2k hp. Now the entry point for the big boys in not the 700 that I have had and not many 5 years ago but 1k, get on the FI sections of C5/6 and lots in this area.
My next build is up in the air as HP is addictive and more is always good, especially for me that has a stocker to drive daily to cure having a Vette to motor around in all the time
07-16-2010, 01:49 PM
#15
Burning Brakes
The biggest reasons not to use a turbo system is because:
A) The majority of the system will not be smog legal in most states. The rear-mounted systems are the only ones that will be because they're after the cats.
B) They're harder to tune.
C) They're more expensive.
Superchargers are far easier to tune and don't cost as much after installation. They're simpler in design and upgrading boost is as simple as changing a pulley. They're not as efficient as a turbo system, but they've definitely come a long way since the old days of power-robbing supercharging systems.
The N/A motors are always going to be the easiest to tune. They don't really have as much potential as a forced induction system, but they can certainly make lots of power for far less money than a forced induction system.
Forced induction is a way of artificially adding displacement. At 1 bar of boost (approx 14.6PSI) you're effectively doubling your motor's displacement. In theory with a 100% efficient system (which none are) you'd double your horse power the motor would normally make at 0 boost. (i.e. a 5.7L motor is the equivalent of an 11.4L motor at 1 bar.)
I'm building an N/A motor because I don't have the money for forced induction and I'd like to keep the added weight to my car down as much as possible. I'm not looking to make a ton of power, and any forced induction system will be overkill for me. But if I wanted to make lots of power N/A, I'd have no choice but to go to a larger displacement motor. 427 is the key cube right now for N/A, but I see many people building 402ci and 408ci motors from 6.0+ blocks. That seems to be the magic number for forced induction as well.
A) The majority of the system will not be smog legal in most states. The rear-mounted systems are the only ones that will be because they're after the cats.
B) They're harder to tune.
C) They're more expensive.
Superchargers are far easier to tune and don't cost as much after installation. They're simpler in design and upgrading boost is as simple as changing a pulley. They're not as efficient as a turbo system, but they've definitely come a long way since the old days of power-robbing supercharging systems.
The N/A motors are always going to be the easiest to tune. They don't really have as much potential as a forced induction system, but they can certainly make lots of power for far less money than a forced induction system.
Forced induction is a way of artificially adding displacement. At 1 bar of boost (approx 14.6PSI) you're effectively doubling your motor's displacement. In theory with a 100% efficient system (which none are) you'd double your horse power the motor would normally make at 0 boost. (i.e. a 5.7L motor is the equivalent of an 11.4L motor at 1 bar.)
I'm building an N/A motor because I don't have the money for forced induction and I'd like to keep the added weight to my car down as much as possible. I'm not looking to make a ton of power, and any forced induction system will be overkill for me. But if I wanted to make lots of power N/A, I'd have no choice but to go to a larger displacement motor. 427 is the key cube right now for N/A, but I see many people building 402ci and 408ci motors from 6.0+ blocks. That seems to be the magic number for forced induction as well.
07-16-2010, 02:29 PM
#16
Good answer. I have 20,000 miles on my STS TT and love it. I did a lot of homework and decided the TT was it for me. I made the right decision but ALL higher HP applications will require lots of bucks spent in all the supporting mods to handle the power and not break so be prepared to spend.
07-16-2010, 02:36 PM
#17
Banned Scam/Spammer
Member Since: May 2007
Location: Machineguns, because I don’t compromise
Posts: 15,685
Received 1,319 Likes
on
788 Posts
TTix > APS (aside from turbos) > A&A > Procharger/Vortech > Stroker anything 402+ > STS > 346 w/heads cam > cam only > bolt ons > stock > O6ama
07-16-2010, 02:38 PM
#18
A few years back the trend seemed to be turbochargers, for those that could afford it. Lately it seems that there is little hype promoting turbo's and those who are upgrading seem to be opting for 427 or larger NA builds, or just installing a supercharger kit, and calling it a day. I was wondering why there has been this shift in thinking. (Or is it just my perception of things?)
The things that come to mind, are:
The price of a 427 engine has come down significantly.
Modifications to the supercharger kits have have made them more reliable, especially as related to belt slippage issues.
Have the turbochargers not kept up with price and performance improvements seen in the other two? Do they have reliablity issues, or high maintenance costs that have made people seek a different path to performance? Also there seems to be fewer options these days when choosing a turbo system.
Don't get me wrong. I would love to have any of the three, done right.
I don't want this to turn into a "I have XYZ system, and it's the best." thread.
The things that come to mind, are:
The price of a 427 engine has come down significantly.
Modifications to the supercharger kits have have made them more reliable, especially as related to belt slippage issues.
Have the turbochargers not kept up with price and performance improvements seen in the other two? Do they have reliablity issues, or high maintenance costs that have made people seek a different path to performance? Also there seems to be fewer options these days when choosing a turbo system.
Don't get me wrong. I would love to have any of the three, done right.
I don't want this to turn into a "I have XYZ system, and it's the best." thread.
