Factory Five Racing Forum banner

turbo vs. super charger

2.1K views 24 replies 19 participants last post by  Wayne Presley  
#1 ·
i was wondering which would be better for a cobra. i was debating in between a turbo or a super charge. what should i do.. any advise is needed...
 
#6 ·
As was stated above, a supercharger is much easier to do. The superchargers generally have a quicker throttle response(depending upon the type), but the turbo route will make more power being it is run off the exhaust energy instead of driven by the engine crank and a pulley. Turbos have the advantage of adjustible boost(via a manual or electronic boost controller), vs a supercharger which requires a pulley change. They both are awesome ways to add power, but unless you have some fabrication skills for the piping, the turbo(or twin-turbo) route is quite a bit more expensive. I've had both types in other cars, and am now a diehard twin-turbo guy.
Thomas
 
#8 ·
A high winding small block with a centrifigal charger is what I would do next time It'll be a little slack on torque which means it wont kill the tires but once the revs are up adios enzo! Twin turbos are nice I'm sure tony wiill comment but hard to install I thing tuning is about equal. The Kenne Bell has a strong following here .some with one will chime in . I had boost in the race mustang then the street mustang but went to the 408 stroker with a carb in the FFR . Who knows it might not get any traction and I may have to do what I just suggested . Got enough leftovers here to re make the blower engine. Bob
 
#9 ·
It also depends on what you want out of the hole. I have thought of either a Procharger setup or a twin turbo application. A twin turbo probably be more efficient with a turbo on each bank, and won't spool up until higher rpm's. But, an intercooled centri is a great thing!!! I agree with Bob Taylor on the enzo statement.
Image

It is a hard decision!
 
#10 ·
I've done a supercharger and a couple of turbo setups (twin and single) on the 5.0 over the last 7 years. At this point the simplicity and reliability of the supercharger is preferable to me over the added complexity and heat of the turbo setups. However, the turbo will get you a lot more oohs and aahs at the get-togethers if that's important to you.

I think the 2.2L KB is just about perfect for a 5.0 block in that it is simple to install, extremely reliable, makes the broadest power curve of any power adder and will support enough hp to split the factory block in half.
 
#11 ·
If you are serious about an SC or turbo. Stick with fuel injection. Tuning will be easier. Plan for it now and you can minimize cost.

Carbs are fine, but they become more complicated when dealing with boost. They don't have the brains to give you great all around running.
 
#12 ·
S/C would be simpler and less expensive, but turbos are more efficient. If you are racing, S/C's build up ALOT of heat.

The newer designs of the centrifigal S/C's are approaching the efficiency of a turbo. A roots style would be best for instant response, as a centrifigal has a little lag (not like a turbo though), but you won't be able to fit a roots style under your hood.

Whatever route you go, make sure your motor is built for it (forged internals, low compression, cam/heads matched for it, etc).
 
#13 ·
I second the fuel injection for either. There is a reason all cars come with fuel injection these days.... not to mention tuning is muucchhh simpler with FI. Easy to find a dyno shop that can tune FI these days, finding one that can tune a carb is getting harder and harder. Nothing wrong with a carb however (easy boys....easy.. :) )

I would ask why are you considerning either? What are you looking to gain? that is where your answer will come from
 
#14 ·
OK, so Ihave to ask.....shouldn't we be asking what he ended up doing? The original post was over a year ago :blink::blink:..... Would be neat to know.
 
#16 ·
This has gotten thoughts wandering- not hard to do BTW. I have a 1985 T-Bird Turbo coupe that is ripe for picking, would this turbo make a good unit or am in left field with this one? also would a second turbo be hard to locate?
 
#21 ·
I am pretty sure that those years had a Garret T3 .60/.63 (auto) and .60/.48 (manual) - or was it the other way around?

Either way, those work pretty well on a 302 in a twin setup. They are capable of making enough power to split the stock block anyway.

Check turbomustangs.com for more info on those turbos, if you do a search there you will find ANY info you ever needed on a DYI turbo project.
 
#19 ·
Turbo would probably be best since these cars are traction limited, but more expensive as previously stated. I would run a procharger over alot of the others since it has its own oil sump, which is nice, if you have an oil leak on the motor at high revs. Just a thought.
 
#23 · (Edited)
Ditto: A supercharger would be much easier, but...

If you have either the $$$ to have someone fabricate a system for you, or the knowledge to build one yourself, turbos are the neatest. Take one ride in a high horsepower, well tuned turbo car and you'll never be the same! :devil2:

Check out these books:
Maximum Boost by Corky Bell
Street Turbocharging by Mark Warner

Here are some pics from around the web:

Ford:
Image


Chevy:
Image


Lexus:
Image
 
#24 ·
hey guys. this is my thread, i cant believe its back to life. well ive decided not to go inforced air for now and stay natural aspirated. im about to do my first start. instead of using my stock motor i decided to totally rebuild my motor. after i get my first start ill let everyone know what i did...