[Warning: M.net content] Turbos make more power but superchargers make more 'torque'
 

old TC vs SC debate... - MX-5 Miata Forum

fuckin retards :vash:

Oh god....:facepalm:

lol @ faggo over there

Not again.

Fun stuff. ;)

Wow, do people at m.net still think the world is flat?? :bang:

Apparently during the milliseconds that my turbo lags, a supercharger car pulls bus lengths on me.

That seems likely...

What amazes me is the fact all this ------s argue about is turbo lag, and late spool, I dont know what miatas they're driving but a regular cruise in my car is ~3k and downshifting puts me at ~4k WTF O_o :vash:

Turbo lag and boost threshold is pretty much a non-issue with most of the turbos we run anyways. At least for me on the street I love where my turbo starts to make boost.

The main problem I find with M.net is that most of them are a bunch of old dinosaurs like me... difference is most of them refuse to learn anything newer than 1980 tech.

I bought a SC right after I bought my Miata thinking just like they did. After I spent some time researching the subject more in depth I sold the SC and am currently accumulating parts for a turbo install instead. If you can actually read and understand with an open mind it's pretty damn clear the turbo wins at damn near everything.

Problem is these people don't have open minds, and don't have the physical ability to comprehend the mere possibility that something could be better than their FFS, p-p-p-powercard 'e-cool' garbage.

The same group of people will debate hand and foot that swapping out their powercard/ecool/bandaids for REAL EMS would make ANY power difference at all. Sadly we removed the S/C from the car before another dyno pull could prove that fact. Not that they would ever believe or buy into it..

I look at it this way, they want to spend $4000+ for 190rwhp then more power to them. The only reason I have an M45 on my car right now is because I don't have the time / weather to complete my turbo install and I'm slightly addicted to boost. The 8psi might not be much, its sure not what 8psi from my turbo would make, but the car will at least get out of its own way.

Here is a few interesting facts.

The Eaton M45 flows approx 300cfm @ 14000rpm and 10psi, which converts to about 24lbs/min of air flow. DeltaT for 10psi is at 4000rpm is 140*F, and 14000rpm its about 185*F. The compressor requires about 25hp to operate 10psi @ 14000.

http://www.rbracing-rsr.com/turbo/TurboMaps/M45flow.gifhttp://www.rbracing-rsr.com/turbo/Tu.../M45deltaT.gifhttp://www.rbracing-rsr.com/turbo/Tu...s/M45power.gif

While I don't have a power consumption or delta-t map for my T04 compressor, I can tell you that 7psi it flows 21lbs/min of air @ 7000rpm. M45 flows around 8.8lbs/min air @ 6000rpm (Compressor) which should be around 2700rpm engine speed IIRC where the turbo flows 9lbs/min @ 3000 engine RPM.

My point is the two compressors flow about the same amount of air at around the same engine RPMs. Which one makes more power, and which one makes it quicker? That'll depend heavily on how well sized my turbine is, along with my downpipe and overall exhaust flow. If I had to guess judging by the parasitic drag on the engine which the compressor of the M45, I think all thing equal the turbo would make more power, and the difference at low engine speed would be pretty minuscule.

Yeah I'm that bored tonight.

Bingo, but the thing that I find funny is that for a lot of people its as much about some sort of weird Ying-Yang like balance in their heads. Surely the turbo cannot be better in every way, thats not balanced. Ahh, the positive displacement blower makes boost sooner/quicker. Therefore they have strengths and weaknesses and all is in balance.

Seriously, you see this all the time. The big engine makes more power, but it has lower HP/L and weighs more. The intercooler does a much better job, but now theres more volume to fill up. This car is much faster, but that car is more 'fun to drive'.

It's weird. Its like the concept that sometimes one approach is far superior to the other overall is not viable. I can understand weighing advantages, but at some point you have a winner.

I see that same thing a lot. You'll also see a slightly different but related argument, the "different strokes for different folks" line of argumentation. Someone should go post a "bias ply vs. radial ply" thread and argue that bias ply tires just have different strengths.

I also blame car magazines. Face it, 95% of internet car guys learned their car info from 2 sources -- their father/older brothers, and car magazines. If automotive writers hadn't for years been complaining about "peaky" turbos and "dangerous turbo lag", we might not find this attitude to be so prevalent.

I don't understand how people still have energy for this argument.

A bit to the east of here, several groups of very similar-minded people have been engaged in an ongoing argument about a piece of relatively barren and worthless real estate (specifically, the only bit of land in that neck of the woods underneath which there is no oil at all) since pretty much the beginning of recorded history, and for many of the same reasons.

By comparison, the turbo / SC debate has only been going on for a few decades. They've got a lot of catching up to do.

seriously hurts my head that they find the "there's lag in your response/thinking" joke funny.

You stole my comments....good thing you wrote it better than I would have :-)

that sjmarcey dude is insane. he's the only one that keeps bring up "lag" he dumps in any sort of delay at all to the term; be it turbo or gearing or even hesitating on the line

When I defined the true definition of turbo lag, he stated it was too commercialized for him to accept.

Is Turbo Lag a genuine issue? - MX-5 Miata Forum

The first production turbocharged automobile engines came from General Motors in 1962.

why do we bother..

http://www.palmspringscarevents.com/...peedLogoLg.jpg

Too many keyboard, internet, magazine, and armchair benchmark racers that post on that board.. 100% of their knowledge of turbochargers was read in some magazine from 1912 and have never in their life driven a turbocharged vehicle. Well, maybe it was a MAC truck or something. That might have "lag."

I'm thinking the SC/turbo debate is a little like politics and religion. Logic and facts will rarely change peoples minds regarding issues involving passion and beliefs.

but he designed this Renault with a T3 back in 1984.

http://www.pbase.com/sjmarcy/image/1...1/original.jpg

and now drives a lotus, he's the king.

Well, bob, I would make sure to plumb it after the throttle body, closer to the injectors, the better. Also, I'd probably recommend a topmount intercooler right over the exhaust, just cut a hole in the hood to make it functional.

Regards,
Nick

:confused::confused:

Wait.. Is that guy actually JimB? :laugh:

That thing looks HELLA FAST!!1!12@

Im so impressed that I just ejaculated.

Well since that one guy posted a picture of an ancient and likely unsuccessful race car, that obviouly means we are all wrong.

I will now sell my turbo kit and buy some ITB's, better yet, SIDE DRAFT CARBZZZ!

...

I'm just going to sell my engine and attach some ropes to a horse, imagine the weight savings, no engine/drivetrain wowy!

ha. similarities huh?

Im going to sell my car and get a 2000 lb boulder sitting on top of a foot long lever, because it would generate 2000 ft/lbs of TORQUE!
Since horsepower is irrelevant, this boulder should be significant faster than my Miata which only makes a measly 150 ft/lbs or so.

In for pics

I'm aware... but even M.netters have advanced past 1962.


Ok some of them at least...

The entire problem is that half them AND half of you guys are totally unwilling to admit that superchargers do things that turbos do not do.

The other half of the problem is that most of the people on each side of the argument have virtually no experience with the other type of FI.

I totally admit they are able to thrill the feeble minded!

Why the hell does everybody think its okay to use insane examples for everything.

Sure, a konnisseg CCXR is supercharged. Yes, Im sure its easier to contol supercharger than it would be Turbocharged. Its also OVER 1000 HP!

If you cant control a 200hp turbo Miata, youre a pussy.

Why not bust out the Bugatti Veyron (mouse) on them. Its turbocharged. And attracted to large bodies of water (lakes).

We all know most of our cars look like this:
http://www.gurneyflap.com/Resources/...-27-nov-07.jpg

Damn it Brian, the T25 is for experienced racers only. And that one is mis-tuned, it should be making peak TQ at 10500, not 9600. It must be the blown welds on the intake. I told you not to use both stages of NAWZ at once on a Tuesday near the summer solstice! Now we have to import new halogen fluid from Japon.

(&^%(137&^$#97@@#!!!!

Can you link to m.net on failblog.com, maybe they could become a sponsor.

Fine, rules...yay. Ok, this guy, up ^here, is obviously an idiot. But he still is allowed to be an idiot. Why. Ban FROM life.

That guys a Tardvark

In response to that guys post, did you know that 69% of statistics are made up on the spot?

When you guys see argument, I see a billboard. Buahahah....... man I had to lol.

He sold the Miata and bought a bunch of the worst looking Loti (Is that the proper plural?) ever produced.. Eurpoa.. LMAO..

Fuck it.

The one person I was attempting to give personal first hand evidence to completely ignored every factual point I've put forward proving his 'lag' argument was useless..

I quit, it blew up two more pages and I'm really not feeling like reading.

Neither was this guy...
How could you understand 1/3 of that and even close to believe that a roots type blower, hot or coldside, would come out anywhere near. Maybe he just didn't want to read, as well.

This is when I too, tap out. I mean, why go out of your way to try and help people when the dill-holes (not this guy, others) with stupid pre-concieved opinions and zero fact (except) drown out any technical knowledge or even a kid who is an Eng. student and runs the piss out of his car all over Southern/Mid-Cal?

Instead he wants to post definitions of "blowoff valve" and "Wastegate." :facepalm:

I still can't figure out why people like that can't understand when you throw down the throttle on a turbo car its going to do the exact same thing everytime. Every time you hit WOT @ ANY rpm, repeating WOT at that same RPM will yield the same results. They make it out to sound like you're shootin' craps at a red light table in someones basement with a .45 up to your head by driving a turbo vehicle.. You just never know when you're gonna crap out and crash or completely end the universe!

Something I've noticed working a lot of auto-x events is there are a lot of people who try and just don't understand the concept of throttle control. Sad to say its a lot of honda owners vehicle has 2 throttle positions, pinned to the floor or off. You try and give some advice to them wanting to help better their times but most don't listen to that either. I was guilty of binary throttle for a long ass time until I asked a seasoned VERY good driver to ride with me and give me tips, one of which was to correct throttle control.

Let him have his glory, he'll never know what hes missing out on.

I was thinking amplitude vs frequency modulated driving lol.

Seriously, If i go back over there, I'm liable to start yelling at the screen.

Ok I'll bite... discounting the Rotrex which is basically a belt driven turbo, what does a positive displacement SC do that's desirable?

makes an annoying noise... and uhhh... makes more power between idle and 2000 rpm...

3000rpm. between idle and 3000rpm, but not really. Since a belt actually takes up more power than it gives at that range... just sayin.

Yah very true.
Ive tried to bring up the parasitic drag and increased driveline inertia but the S/C folk have have any response...

He is not insane and he has more racing cars experience (including turbos) than 99% of the people here and over there too :)

oh, you think so? :giggle:

Yup, takes 2 minutes of reading to figure out who has real racing experience and who is just doing forum racing.
IIRC in that thread Savington, Emilio and sjmarcy were the guys who had posts worth reading. Everything else was mostly worthless noise by the keyboard racers ... :laugh:

Dont you guys know?! A PD S/C setup with a FMIC idles great! :jerkit:

I recently saw "the big gulp" in person and holy fucking shit, any turbo setup that I've had or will ever have is 100x less complex. I figure its a beast in itself, something like 6 intercoolers, one mounted right behind the diff lol. What I hate is that "the big gulp" , a mp64 coldside s/c, was developed in 2003/2004 which is before FFS came along :idea:

Unfortnately it had a shitty tune and the owner couldn't take it past 1/2 throttle before leaning out completely. Still made 13-15psi at 1/2 throttle and felt like 160rwhp or so based off my butt-dyno. I hope I can help the new owner with a base tune so he's shit doesn't blow up too fast before he can get a professional tune.

I got to page 3 on that thread and figured out I was wasting time lol.

sjmarcy is a retard.

For me personally, it whines ;)

I've had people comment that the car is easier to drive than their turbo'd 5's, but I have no preference over either, so you can't flame me :makeout:

MP62, not 45, but yeah, it's kinda ouotdated now.

Still i'd quite like to own it, bit of a mission to get it here though ;)