Questions about Superchargers vs. Blowers and Turbocharged V8's

Home  \  Domestic Cars  \  Questions about Superchargers vs. Blowers and Turbocharged V8's

I know some about supercharger's and what all they do and how they work, but I do not knwo muhc at all about blowers, after a search of some few sites I did not come up with much information. From all I could gather blowers are more alike superchargers than turbo's but hwo do they work and what are the gains. Do blowers cost more? When compared which comes out on top, a blower or a supercharger? Also if you could just link me to a site with some of this information that would be jsut as helpful, I tried to search for one but came up blank, maybe I'm just typing in the wrong things.
Another thing I have been wondering for sometime is why I have never heard of or seen a Turbocharged V8 in real life or on-line. I have heard ti is Much harder and costly to turbo a V8 but wouldn't that be a great drag strip combo? V8-Low end power Turbo-Top End


posted by  Pythias

A blower, a turbocharger, a supercharger. Wait...blower, turbocharger, supercharger. Wait...what? :doh:

posted by  67Coronet383

"blower" is slang for supercharger usually, though I've heard people use the term for turbos, too.

As for never seeing or hearing about a turbo V8, you're awfully sheltered. There are MANY companies doing turbo V8s. Some of them are kinda famous: Callaway, Gale Banks, Turbonetics, Incon, etc.

The first production turbocharged car was a GM V8 (the '62 Olds Jetfire). One of the latest turbo V8 production cars is the Lotus Esprit V8.

But you say you haven't heard of them online?

Hell, we discussed the factory turbo Trans Am with the 301 right here on this forum just a short time ago... Hell you even participated in the thread! ad.jpg

posted by  ChrisV

My point exactly.

posted by  67Coronet383

You are quite right I did forget about the Trans Am Turbo, I didn;'t really mean never, but rarely had I heard of it and even so wasn't that turbo V8 underpowered and not in production for too long? I might be wrong about that though but I thought I remembered something like 190hp stock. I had meant by more by actually seeing them or hearing of them done more so in real life. And most of those production V8 turbo's are kinda exotics aren't they? Might be why I haven't heard of them, although turbonetic's is a different story. I always heard of people supercharging their V8's, so is it not true that a turbo V8 would be a near perfect combo because of the low-end power and the turbo's high end? Also is it a great deal harder and/or expensive to turbo a V8 like I have heard?

posted by  Pythias

The reason you see V8s being supercharged (though frankly any factory effort other than the Cobra and Lightning are pretty exotic) more often is that the packaging of a non-centrifugal supercharger is extremely easy in the valley between the heads where the intake manifold is. centrigugal superchargers package much liek aturbo except that you dont' have any tricky exhaust plumbing.

And superchargers lend themselves to the lower rpm ranges of most large displacement engines. Part of the apeal of large displacemtn engines is teh large amounts of power rfom righ off idle. superchargers enhance that, turbos don't. Yes, that factory Trans Am was a bit anemic in the horsepower department, but it had a lot of torque. And for the era it wasn't too bad (not many cars had much power then, anyhow) Part of the problem was that it was carburated, low boost, and ran out of rpms early. Remember, teh turbo dosn't add more rpm, so it needs to work in the range the engine already operates in.

But, it can be done. Turbocharging v8s has been going on in the aftermarket for decades, and is about the same cost as superchargers. Kits have been available for a lot of engines, and for a while even sold through places like JC Whitney!

Follow that link from Google and look at some of the results...

It's not uncommon at all.

posted by  ChrisV

Thank you, so tell me then does this mean kinda if the engine is larger, and doesn't rev as high superchargers are more beneficial than turbochargers? But if the engine's rev decently turbo's would be more effective? I was just wondering drag strip wise for a V8 if turbo's would be as beneficial or more beneficial than superchargers, because the V8 has the low end power and the turbo the high-end like I said, seems to be a better combo than a V8 and a supercharger, maybe I'm wrong,

posted by  Pythias

Well the 4.0 litre XR6T kicks in at 2k rpm

and as for the strip, well hairdryers are frowned on in the top levels because in the wrong hands.........

posted by  Wally

There are guys running 'stangs in nearly any class of drag racing with a turbo...Just pick up an issue of MM&FF or Mustangs & 5.0 and you'll see. Turbo kits are getting cheaper and cheaper for V-8's now(at least in the Ford realm) and they're gaining popularity like crazy. A base, entry level Vortech centrifugal s/c goes for around $1,900, but that's for 4-5lbs of boost and you can't run that on much more than a stock or very mild 5.0. Whereas you can get turbo kits for around $3-4k.

Superchargers do give you instant power because they start making boost instantly....BUT, centrifugal s/c's will keep making boost as long as you can keep revving the engine(assuming you don't sail past the maximum safe impeller speed, after you pass the maximum efficent impeller speed you can still make some power but intake air temps start soaring)...I've seen combo's where peak boost was achieved just before bouncing off the rev limiter(that's an improperly sized s/c head).

Bottom line, anything can be sized to work well in nearly any RPM range

posted by  Sick88Tbird

Well you could always run both supercharger and turbocharger.

posted by  x1/9-rally

turbo= sucker

posted by  jhains

Lets gets some things out in the open:

both superchargers and turbochargers compress air;
both are generically superchargers :- super as a physics term loosley means an elevated condition above ambient, in this case pressure;
a turbocharger gets it's name from the use of a turbine;
a properly sized turbocharger will perform very well;
about 99.9% of car discussion board members who profess to know about turbochargers actually know squat about them;
a supercharger is colloquially called a supercharger, blower or huffer;
a turbocharger is colloquially called a turbo, hairdryer or snail;
about 99.9% of expert sites provide plagiarised error ridden imfornation about turbochargers;
an oversized supercharger has increased compressed air temp, pumping and parasitic losses for equivalent duty of a correctly sized unit;
mix 'n matching turbocharger components (hybrid) for optimum performance is relatively easy and cheap compared to huffers;
fitting a turbocharger is relatively easy;
no one, but boy racers without a clue, pay full price.

posted by  Wally

I see, my friend pointed out to me that a turbo is mroe expensive to tune or somethin, He said around 1k if someone were to turbocharged a 5.0. Is this true? Around 800-1000 to tune a turbo on a V8? Or is a tuning same on a V8 or 4cyc? N thanks for all the info Wally very helpful :thumbs:

posted by  Pythias

It all depends on where you go and what equipment is used. Engine size generally doesn't make a difference when it comes to tuning.

posted by  Sick88Tbird

K, thanks for the info, much appreciated :)

posted by  Pythias

More expensive to tune? You'd probably better ask him why. There's no generic statement as to which is better on a absolute scope (or even on one car). Comparing a 2003/2004 Mustang Cobra to a 1998 GSX, the cobra is easier to tune, seeing as how all you need is a 2.8 pulley, as opposed to something like a 20G turbo ( :drool: ) and a new wastegate, new BOV, (I believe) new piping, AND a computer to change the fuel input across the powerband.

There is no absolute answer for money costs into tuning, either. As for turboing the 5.0, it'd probably be a custom job. I've never seen any cheap pre-made kits for it, as opposed to Eaton's that are sold with kits for the 5.0 all the time.

posted by  Godlaus

Do any of these count?
If not would it cost more to turbo a 5.0 rather than supercharge it?

posted by  Pythias

There are companies mass producing turbo kits for 5.0 'Stangs from '87 all the way to current models(will work on '79-'86 models if converted to later model EFI). Hellion is a company formed by mustang racer John Urist, very potent kit, includes everything you need...only for 5-speed cars. A recent test vehicle dyno'd 190rwhp and 275rwtq in stock trim...with just the Hellion turbo kit, it produced 392rwhp and 487rwtq at a modest 9lbs.

Pro Turbo is another company. MM&FF also has a turbo'd project(Project Hooligan Hot-Rod) car which runs an HP Performance turbo kit. They got the car to run 10's with an AOD 3.31 gears 31 spline axles, slicks/skinnies, and some suspension parts...they had the Lentech Strip terminator trans with the trans-brake feature. The used a bone stock engine from the junkyard and had to o-ring the block because they kept blowing head that time they added new bearings and did a quick hone on the cylinders. The car was running 11's without slicks/skinnies, no trans-brake, no suspension mods, stock 28 spline axles and 3.73 gears(was cruising through the traps at about 6000rpm).

Racer Walsh, is another company that makes turbo kits for mustangs with just about any factory engine size. Their 5.0 kits start at around 3k with the actual turbo being almost 1k additional.

Don't tell me there aren't any mass produced bolt-on turbo kits for 5.0 'Stangs. There are probably 5 more that I can't remember off of the top of my head.

posted by  Sick88Tbird

Your Message