5.0......supercharger or turbo(s)?

midlife

New Member
Established Member
Joined
Jul 5, 2010
Messages
16
Location
atlanta
someone has a thread about the first turbo´d 2011 mustang gt.

this is what i posted in that thread:
____________________________________
fwiw, i currently have a 2008 335 (twin turbo)... the car´s a beauty and it is fast but:
i do not like the heat that is a natural byproduct generated by the turbos.

i thought the mustang crowd was more into superchargers?
my limited FI knowledge tells me that although a supercharger is LESS efficient than a turbo(s), it also produces little or no heat correct?

is that the reason that most mustang FIs are supercharged versus turbo(s) ??

_______________________________________


can some of you real motorheads out there discuss the pros and cons of supercharging versus turbo(s) for the new 5.0 mustang ??
........for me, power and engine longevity are my major concerns.

thanks
 

Wylde Horses

4.56 gear advocate
Established Member
Joined
Mar 23, 2004
Messages
620
Location
Port Coquitlam, BC
Both produce heat - turbos do produce more, but in both cases you really should be using an intercooler. However, I would take an intercooled turbo'ed engine over an intercooled s/c'ed engine any day. The only things superchargers really have going for them is that they are cheaper and easier to install on a stock engine. The (major) downside is that they produce alot more drag on the engine to achieve the same horsepower than a turbo would. So if you were to take two different engines, both producing 500rwhp, the s/c'ed engine would experience alot more abuse than the engine with the turbo(s).
 

midlife

New Member
Established Member
Joined
Jul 5, 2010
Messages
16
Location
atlanta
If that is the case - it will be interesting to see the price difference between a s/c kit and a turbo kit for the 5.0
.......obviously an apples to apples camparision would be kits producing the same hp.
 

Wylde Horses

4.56 gear advocate
Established Member
Joined
Mar 23, 2004
Messages
620
Location
Port Coquitlam, BC
If that is the case - it will be interesting to see the price difference between a s/c kit and a turbo kit for the 5.0
.......obviously an apples to apples camparision would be kits producing the same hp.

Yeah, that would be interesting - I wonder how much more psi the s/c would have to run to be at the asme power level.
 

Nathan'sTsi

New Member
Established Member
Joined
Jan 14, 2004
Messages
1,293
Location
Texas
Both produce heat - turbos do produce more, but in both cases you really should be using an intercooler. However, I would take an intercooled turbo'ed engine over an intercooled s/c'ed engine any day. The only things superchargers really have going for them is that they are cheaper and easier to install on a stock engine. The (major) downside is that they produce alot more drag on the engine to achieve the same horsepower than a turbo would. So if you were to take two different engines, both producing 500rwhp, the s/c'ed engine would experience alot more abuse than the engine with the turbo(s).

Turbos don't produce any more heat than superchargers. The just take all the heat energy from the exhaust, and put it close to things that might not react well. They typically boast higher adiabatic efficiency to boot, which means they will heat the charge air less that the supercharger.
 

AmnDucky

New Member
Established Member
Joined
Jun 24, 2010
Messages
384
Location
San Jose
That is too broad of a statement. You have turbo's, centrifugal superchargers, positive displacement roots style superchargers, and twin screw superchargers. Superchargers get better throttle response, especially off of the line. Centrifugals give you throttle response like a supercharger, but efficiencies like a turbo since they charge the air in the same basic way (impellers). Roots style blowers create the most heat, and will get heat soaked first (where the extra heat from more boost counteracts the extra boost and you see no gain in power). Twin screws dont heat up the air like a roots will, but still have that extra stress on the motor. If I remember correctly, KB says it takes about 70hp to spin their blowers. Turbo's make a crap ton of power, there is a reason so many drag cars use them. But they do best in the higher RPM's. I personally will be going with a screw type Whipple when I have the money. They advertise adiabatic efficiency on par with a turbo (emphasis on the "they advertise" part, I dont know), and I want the throttle response and super flat torque curve.

Oh, and I dont know if it applies to you. But turbos will always make the same boost at any altitude, they will forever spin faster until the BOV opens. Since a blower is run by a belt and its speeds are controlled, you will lose boost in higher altitudes.
 

Nathan'sTsi

New Member
Established Member
Joined
Jan 14, 2004
Messages
1,293
Location
Texas
Oh, and I dont know if it applies to you. But turbos will always make the same boost at any altitude, they will forever spin faster until the BOV opens. Since a blower is run by a belt and its speeds are controlled, you will lose boost in higher altitudes.

I think you mean wastegate, as that is what regulates the speed of the wheels, and thus, the amount of boost turbos run :)
 

wazslow

New Member
Established Member
Joined
Dec 4, 2006
Messages
330
Location
Fallsington, PA
I think you mean wastegate, as that is what regulates the speed of the wheels, and thus, the amount of boost turbos run :)

Regulates the speed of the wheels? :shrug: All it does it release exahaust gas before it gets to the turbo. The more exhaust gas that reaches the turbo the faster it spins, the more boost it makes. Not sure what that has to do with regulating speed of the wheels.
 

StacyStangz

"Supercharged Stacy" - PR
Established Member
Joined
Nov 24, 2003
Messages
1,046
Location
NC/SC
It seems with the displacement Nitrous is the popular fix for now.
Building the car is a different story. I cannot wait to see the turbo/supercharger builds coming soon..
 

Nathan'sTsi

New Member
Established Member
Joined
Jan 14, 2004
Messages
1,293
Location
Texas
Regulates the speed of the wheels? :shrug: All it does it release exahaust gas before it gets to the turbo. The more exhaust gas that reaches the turbo the faster it spins, the more boost it makes. Not sure what that has to do with regulating speed of the wheels.

Uhhhh....everything? In regards to wheel speed, I was refering to the turbine and compressor wheels. Releasing the exhaust before it reaches the turbine wheel keeps the wheel from increasing speed, thus limiting boost (as long as wastegate flow is sufficient). Thus, the job of the watgeate is to regulate the speed of the wheels and therefore, boost.
For the life of me, I don't see how you inferred that I was talking about any other kind of wheel, lol.
 
Last edited:

midlife

New Member
Established Member
Joined
Jul 5, 2010
Messages
16
Location
atlanta
IMHO, nitrous is definitely a power / speed adder - but it only works when turned on.
I like the permanent power of FI be it s/c or turbos.
I would rather pay more $$$ for the same FI power than to go with nitrous which I believe is inherently more dangerous and stressful to the motor.

Btw, having a 335 at altitude right now, I know that your turbo psi is handicapped the higher in altitude you go - so I am not so sure how s/c are versus turbos at high altitude.

Fwiw, am moving back to sea level soon so altitude no longer concerns me.
 
Last edited:

StacyStangz

"Supercharged Stacy" - PR
Established Member
Joined
Nov 24, 2003
Messages
1,046
Location
NC/SC
I totally agree with you Midlife.
Id rather go Turbo or Supercharger too..
The 5.0 has more compression (like when the LS1 first came out). Therefore, taking the engine apart is a must when adding the poweradder.
I cant wait to see what these power system companies come up with! ;)
 

Nathan'sTsi

New Member
Established Member
Joined
Jan 14, 2004
Messages
1,293
Location
Texas
IMHO, nitrous is definitely a power / speed adder - but it only works when turned on.
I like the permanent power of FI be it s/c or turbos.
I would rather pay more $$$ for the same FI power than to go with nitrous which I believe is inherently more dangerous and stressful to the motor.

Btw, having a 335 at altitude right now, I know that your turbo psi is handicapped the higher in altitude you go - so I am not so sure how s/c are versus turbos at high altitude.

Fwiw, am moving back to sea level soon so altitude no longer concerns me.

Every car is hanicapped by altitude. However, a turbo car will build the same boost as long as the compressor wheel can keep up with the demand. The choke flow of a turbo is based and tested at a certain atmospheric pressure. At higher altitude, the air is less dense so the compressor map shifts to the left. This means their is now a lower choke flow for the same turbo at the higher altitude. With less airflow "available" from the compressors, the turbos will not be able to maintain the same boost pressure as if they were at sea level.
 

wazslow

New Member
Established Member
Joined
Dec 4, 2006
Messages
330
Location
Fallsington, PA
Uhhhh....everything? In regards to wheel speed, I was refering to the turbine and compressor wheels. Releasing the exhaust before it reaches the turbine wheel keeps the wheel from increasing speed, thus limiting boost (as long as wastegate flow is sufficient). Thus, the job of the watgeate is to regulate the speed of the wheels and therefore, boost.
For the life of me, I don't see how you inferred that I was talking about any other kind of wheel, lol.


That makes more sense. Sorry, Ive been sick all week, im a little out of it :rolling:
 

wazslow

New Member
Established Member
Joined
Dec 4, 2006
Messages
330
Location
Fallsington, PA
I totally agree with you Midlife.
Id rather go Turbo or Supercharger too..
The 5.0 has more compression (like when the LS1 first came out). Therefore, taking the engine apart is a must when adding the poweradder.
I cant wait to see what these power system companies come up with! ;)

The GM LS3's are 10.7:1 and they love boost. Plenty of 650-725 rwhp cars running around with stock motors. I'll bet you'll see plenty of guys making alot of power with the stock 5.0 motors, especially with the variable cam timing.
 

mustangmanjeff

Active Member
Established Member
Joined
May 8, 2005
Messages
4,228
Location
somewhereland mexico CT
f power adders. thats for the pre <2011 mustangs, we now have a 400hp all motor beast stock so we can run all motor with the likes of the chevys 5.7, 6.0 liter ls cars :) do the math stock is already 350-380rwhp , tune only is 370-390rwhp, tune intake and exaust is 400-430rwhp, so say full bolt on cars will be 430-450rwhp, bring on the cams or heads or both and you have a 450-500+rwhp n/a mustang gt :)
 

assasinator

1 N the head,2 N da chest
Established Member
Joined
May 13, 2010
Messages
707
Location
bfe
the intercooler on my 96 gets IAT's to within 10 degrees of ambient on a short run. they do rise a bit when really running it down the highway, but its stil only a few more degrees. the key is airflow and cooling on the intercooler. not air to water for the street.


the supercharger guys really do have to upgrade their air to water setup usually, but it does package superior.

IMO turbo with heat wrapping and large intercooler is superior for DD. for racing a ice boxed air to water is king.


turbo inlet pressure is easily correctable. high altitude means you select a turbo for the conditions. getting to keep the horepower the blower loses to driving

if i ran a turbo in a 5.0, it would be a stalled auto. like my 96, turbo autos are killer.
 

AmnDucky

New Member
Established Member
Joined
Jun 24, 2010
Messages
384
Location
San Jose
I think you mean wastegate, as that is what regulates the speed of the wheels, and thus, the amount of boost turbos run :)
You are right, my mistake. Remember children never drive or post while fatigued :-D
IMHO, nitrous is definitely a power / speed adder - but it only works when turned on.
I like the permanent power of FI be it s/c or turbos.
I would rather pay more $$$ for the same FI power than to go with nitrous which I believe is inherently more dangerous and stressful to the motor.

Btw, having a 335 at altitude right now, I know that your turbo psi is handicapped the higher in altitude you go - so I am not so sure how s/c are versus turbos at high altitude.

Fwiw, am moving back to sea level soon so altitude no longer concerns me.
Turbos will take longer to spool at altitude, but should theoretically make the same boost. Small aircraft use "turbo-normalized" engines these days. They put a turbo on the motor but limit it at 0lbs of boost. Useless at sea level, but it allows the engine to perform like it was at sea level when the plane is at 10,000' because the turbo will forever spin faster to hit sea level pressure.
the intercooler on my 96 gets IAT's to within 10 degrees of ambient on a short run. they do rise a bit when really running it down the highway, but its stil only a few more degrees. the key is airflow and cooling on the intercooler. not air to water for the street.


the supercharger guys really do have to upgrade their air to water setup usually, but it does package superior.

IMO turbo with heat wrapping and large intercooler is superior for DD. for racing a ice boxed air to water is king.


turbo inlet pressure is easily correctable. high altitude means you select a turbo for the conditions. getting to keep the horepower the blower loses to driving

if i ran a turbo in a 5.0, it would be a stalled auto. like my 96, turbo autos are killer.

One thing I like about turbos is you can change boost on the fly with a controller. Get an SCT livewire with 6 tunes for different boost levels, and adjust your tunes and boost on the fly. I'm still going to go with a whipple when the money comes, and run a moderate boost level. I've ridden in my cousins turbo mustang. And while its fun as hell, I dont like the lag.
 

Users who are viewing this thread



Top