supercharge or twin turbo..

[Tonys02Z28]

hey guys i have some money saved up and was wondering what would be better on my car a supercharger or twin turbo.what are the pros and cons for both..

[Paulster2]

Depends on what you want to do. If put together right, the turbos are the way to go, IMHO. Either way it should be a lot of fun.

[Tonys02Z28]

i want something that makes alot of power and it would only be driven once a couple times a month but alot of people have superchargers on there car and some have turbos but ive never seen a twin turbo setup..

[Blown1993Z28]

Originally Posted by Tonys02Z28

i want something that makes alot of power and it would only be driven once a couple times a month but alot of people have superchargers on there car and some have turbos but ive never seen a twin turbo setup..

Twin turbos are propably the best generally speaking but there really isn't enough room in the new F bodies to fit them (without removing the A/C etc) It can be done but requires A LOT of fabrication. Just to see whats involved look at the nicest Corvette Kit I know about;
725 HP Twin Turbo LS1, ZO6 | Lingenfelter Performance Engineering
C5 Corvette Turbo | Lingenfelter Performance Engineering

1. Superchargers are WAY easier to mount with ready access to the accessory belt.
2. Superchargers make boost linearly with RPM, Turbos are exponential causing turbo lag and needing a wastegate.
3. I used to believe that turbos using a "waste product" (exhaust) was preferable to the parasitic loss of the drive belt on a Supercharger. Turns out the extra backpressure used to spin the impellar does sap power from the motor. Basically backpressure is not "free".
4. The turbos down pipe and the turbo introduce A LOT of heat right where you don't want it, near your intake.
5. Many superchargers have self contained oil or like mine a greased bearing. Circulating turbo debris around your motor is a hazard.

P.S. I did much research on Turbocharging a 4th Gen Camaro and came across many problems. It is possible to fit small Turbos where the Pre Cats go on the 95-97 or one Turbo where the Y pipe is but you will end up using flexible exhaust tubing to duct all the airflow. Check out this home build Turbo site;
Build Your Own Turbo Kit

[Supercharged B4C]

turbo's are for 4cyl's, blowers are for V8's jk. i vote supercharger tho cause i have one

[hissin'98]

Supercharger would be easier to fab up even if its a totally off the wall custom. Twins will take a lot more time to map out the system and fab up all the piping, placement and such. Turbo lag is not really a factor when the system is in harmony. So its really going to come down to how long you want to be working on your project.

[Randy L]

Squires Turbo Systems - Camaro LS1

A couple years back, I thought STS had a dual turbo option for the F-bodies. I hear this is an extremely easy install and has no noticeable turbo lag due to the smaller impellar size.

A member in my old F-body club in Hawaii had the STS on his LS1, and it was FAST! You could hear that blow off valve hiss real loud.

I personally like the sound of a supercharger's whine over the turbo sound.

According to the experts, the turbo is much more efficient since it's driven by exhaust (power is already used up in the combustion chamber). The blower is belt driven, which requires power to drive. But here's my argument...if turbos ARE more efficient as the experts claim, why aren't the top fuel dragsters using them? They use blowers.

[Randy L]

Forgot to add...there's an old video on the web (either youtube or streetfire) of a twin turbo LS1 Trans Am racing a guy on a fast bike on the freeway. The bike could not pull away from the T/A and the biker was giving big thumbs ups to the car.

[Blown1993Z28]

Originally Posted by Randy L

Squires Turbo Systems - Camaro LS1

A couple years back, I thought STS had a dual turbo option for the F-bodies. I hear this is an extremely easy install and has no noticeable turbo lag due to the smaller impellar size.

The turbo lag comes from the volume of air being moved around. Longer pipes mean more volume. You just cant avoid it!

Cut and pasted from exotic performance plus;

"I had a potential customer pm me, inquiring about ATI ProChargers, and their cost versus the less expensive STS turbo kits. Below is my reply to him.
The STS kits look like a good deal, here is a list of my opinion of them, and why I don't sell them anymore:
1. STS claims that heat is not required to help spool the turbo, that exhaust velocity does the job.
Major retailers of the STS kits sell the kits with exhaust wrap, to help spool the turbo. We have done this at our shop, and it helps quite a bit. It is obvious that the closer to the engine the turbo is mounted, the more efficient it is going to be.
I copied this from the STS website.
"Doesn't heat create the velocity in the exhaust gasses to spool the turbo?
No, heat doesn't create velocity. Heat creates volume. If you look at any of the physics laws for gasses, you will find that pressure and volume and heat are related. PV=NRT is a popular one, The V isn't for velocity, it is for Volume.
The turbine housing is what creates the velocity. The scrolling design that reduces the volume of the exhaust chamber as it scrolls around causes the gasses to have to increase in velocity and pressure to maintain the same flow rate.
Hotter gasses have more volume, thus requiring a higher A/R which in effect means that it starts at say 3" and scrolls down to approximately 1". Lower temperature gasses are denser and have less volume, so they require a lower A/R housing which would start at the same 3" volume, as the turbine housings use standard flanges, and scroll down to say 3/4".
Now if you were to reverse the housings in application, the conventional turbo would spool up extremely quick, at say around 1500 rpm but would cause too much backpressure at higher rpms because the higher volume of gas couldn't squeeze through the 3/4" hole without requiring a lot of pressure to force it through. On the reverse side, the remote mounted turbo with its cooler denser gasses, wouldn't spool up till say around 4000 rpms but once spooled up would make efficient power because it doesn't require hardly any backpressure to push the lower volume of gas through the larger 1" hole."
So I take it the exhaust wrap should not make a difference?
2. You don't want to run catalytic converters with a rear mount turbo. Years ago a guy brought in a Ferrari to us that had a rear mount turbo. One of the catalytic converters internals came apart, as they sometimes do, and parts of it lodged into the turbo, ruining it. I predict that this will be happening to the STS turbo customers.
3. The oil return line is routed into the passenger side oil cap on the STS kits. This line has a habit of coming loose, and spraying oil into the engine compartment. It happened to us, and I have read where it has happened to other people.
These engines already have enough oil returning down through the heads, they don't need more! This is a bad design, and many people are rerouting the oil return line to the oil pan, where it should be in the first place. The problem with running the line to the pan is now you have to drill or punch a hole into the oil pan to run the oil line, unless you remove the oil pan. We recently removed the oil pan on a customer's car, and welded a bung into the pan for the oil return line.
4. The turbo hangs without brackets supporting it, and will sag over time. We add a bracket when we install these kits, I don't link seeing the turbo dangling there.
5. The air filter is in a bad location, as is susceptible to dust, water, dirt, etc. STS offers a cover that goes over the filter, but we found the cover seriously hinders performance. We proved that on our chassis dyno.
6. On the F Body STS kit, a driver side subframe connector cannot be used. STS claims their plumbing that is routed down the driver side does the job of a subframe connector. We find that humorous, at best!
7. The plumbing underneath the car hangs too low in my opinion, and you don't want a lowered car with an STS kit on it.
8. The silicone couplers that are provided with an STS front mount intercooler are thin, and we had two of them blow apart. The intercooler plumbing that was provided with the front mount intercooler option that we ordered for a customer's car was poorly routed, we ended up using our tubing from our front mount kits that we sell.
9. The oil lines sure have a long way to run, from the front to the rear, and back up front. If a leak developed, it could be a quick way to ruin an engine.
10. It would be relatively easy for someone to slide underneath the rear of an STS equipped car, and steal someones turbo.
11. The boost line running back up to the engine from the turbo has silicone couplers at various points along the way, and can blow apart.
12. Any exhaust leaks will diminish the efficiency of a rear mount turbo.


Hopefully this list will help you in your quest for having a quick car! Bob
Suspension/Chassis: Performance list for those of you who own a Camaro or Firebird

"A member in my old F-body club in Hawaii had the STS on his LS1, and it was FAST! You could hear that blow off valve hiss real loud. "

Yeah I consider that a plus. The BOV isn't directed back into the exhaust like normal turbos it just vents into the air unmuffled

"I personally like the sound of a supercharger's whine over the turbo sound."

Amen Brother!

"According to the experts, the turbo is much more efficient since it's driven by exhaust (power is already used up in the combustion chamber). The blower is belt driven, which requires power to drive. But here's my argument...if turbos ARE more efficient as the experts claim, why aren't the top fuel dragsters using them? They use blowers."

I used to believe the same about Turbos efficiency. Turns out not to be true though. Think about it, Pacesetter LTs, ORY and Magnaflow catback increase my HP due to less backpressure. Logically, Turbos adding backpressure DOES cost HP. Its just a law of Physics, energy is used spinning the Turbo.
Top Fuel Dragsters use blowers because their boost is proportional (linear)to engine RPM, exactly what the engine needs. Turbos boost is exponentially related to exhaust flow. Without getting into Calculas (formula is complicated) lets just say Turbos make too little boost at Low RPM (lag) and Too Much at higher RPM (BOV)

[Forgiven]

"...if turbos ARE more efficient as the experts claim, why aren't the top fuel dragsters using them? They use blowers."

There really isn't anything efficient about a T.F. car. It is all about raw HP made in the quickest way possible, thus the blower. Good thread showing the weakness of some turbo systems, etc. I still think that is the way to go on a daily driver type of car.

[Blown1993Z28]

Originally Posted by Forgiven

"...if turbos ARE more efficient as the experts claim, why aren't the top fuel dragsters using them? They use blowers."

There really isn't anything efficient about a T.F. car. It is all about raw HP made in the quickest way possible, thus the blower. Good thread showing the weakness of some turbo systems, etc. I still think that is the way to go on a daily driver type of car.

From what I hear the TF Dragster's blowers sap an INSANE amount of HP at high RPM. If you insist on the STS just be sure to remove your cat, use heat wrap, use the air filter sheild and run the oil return to the oil pan. Also a methanol injection kit will help your engine handle the boost (you can use a bigger BOV)

[Tonys02Z28]

wow now im really thinking twice about the twin turbos.but i dont have any ats so i dont think that would matter and also is there any other twin turbos i can mount or is sts the only one..also whats a good supercharger out there..

[Blown1993Z28]

Originally Posted by Tonys02Z28

wow now im really thinking twice about the twin turbos.but i dont have any ats so i dont think that would matter and also is there any other twin turbos i can mount or is sts the only one..also whats a good supercharger out there..

In case you thought I was exaggerating on the Turbo pipes look at this

My Business - Twin Turbo kit

And this pic doesn't even really show how cramped it really is. They never show the kit installed because it would scare people away.

I got a Powerdyne Supercharger and its good for low boost. They got bought out and prices went up A LOT so I can't recommend them. Here are the two most people get. Beware they cost over $5,000 each!
ProCharger Centrifugal Superchargers
Vortech 4GK218-010SQ - Vortech Centrifugal Supercharger Kits - Overview - SummitRacing.com#

[hissin'98]

Yea, it sounds like most of those statements about the sts are bs and bogus. I haven't encountered any of those problems above. Silicone couplings blowing apart? Please. And spraying oil in the engine compartment when the line comes loose? Its a neumatic connection so unless you fail to connect it fully it would obviously come apart (carelessness). I guesss what's sad is there are many people out there who just don't give a crap about their cars. I know I have seen two sts camaros and both were absolutely hammered on. The guy who tunes my car built a gto with the twin sts system and pushes almost 20psi and 750rwhp and also hasn't had any of those problems.

I think for your end of the deal, simplicity is going to out weight the all out hp factor. I was debating on a magnacharger but the clearancing of the cowl kinda sucks. Vortech and procharger are two excellent brands. Build it up and put strap on procharger F1 baby! Those are impressive.

[Blown1993Z28]

Originally Posted by hissin'98

Yea, it sounds like most of those statements about the sts are bs and bogus. I haven't encountered any of those problems above. Silicone couplings blowing apart? Please. And spraying oil in the engine compartment when the line comes loose? Its a neumatic connection so unless you fail to connect it fully it would obviously come apart (carelessness). I guesss what's sad is there are many people out there who just don't give a crap about their cars. I know I have seen two sts camaros and both were absolutely hammered on. The guy who tunes my car built a gto with the twin sts system and pushes almost 20psi and 750rwhp and also hasn't had any of those problems.

I just cut and pasted this from a shop that has installed many STSs but their arguments sound logical. You disputed 3 out of 12 points. I don't see how that means "Yea, it sounds like most of those statements about the sts are bs and bogus" Your dispute about the silicon couplers and oil line leaking isn't a good one. Just because some people have not had a specific problem doesn't mean there is no problem. Take the Optispark for example. Some people have had no issues with theirs for over 100,000 miles and then some people have had to replace it 3 or 4 times. Point is there are problems with the Opti and GM tried to bandaid it with venting. According to your logic GM could have said well some people's Optisparks work so complaints about them are bs and bogus.

I understand you already paid for and installed your STS so you want it to be good. I'm glad you are happy with your investment and hope you never have any of those issues, but honestly you do have to consider the product's history of problems. The rear mount concept is a comprimise to squeeze a turbo into a cramped car. As with all comprimises there will be some drawbacks. There WILL be additional turbo lag but luckily the LS1 moves a high CFM of air and has good low end torque to help out. The deal killer (yes I actually almost bought one myself) is the turbo's and air filter's location. In the winter when snow melts there are large salty puddles. Hot turbo + ice cold water = cracked housing. Add to that all the road debris/water splashing that it will ingest.
It seems people are sharply divided on whether the STS is a good idea. Your opinion of the STS is more relevant than mine because you actually have one and I don't. Still though you should value the opinion of a Speed Shop that actually sold and installed many STS kits.