Pontiac GTO Forum banner
1 - 20 of 65 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
55 Posts
GTODEALER said:
Power and torque is phenominal -vs- supercharger....
Oh yes, but you also forgot to mention the $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$ and tuninig issues. And the extreme heat developed under the hood!
Basicly you will develop more low end torque with a turbo vs. a centrificul supercharger but it gets pretty even up top.
A roots type gets the nod for low end torque but being positive displacement it runs out of power around 5500 rpm.:confused
IMHO the best bang for your buck is the Centrificul supergharger.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,541 Posts
I've got a STS turbo car that we built here and I'd put it up against any other "bolt on" centrifigal s/c kit out there. It's a base STS kit with intercooler and 8lbs of boost. If money is not an option (like HTRDLNCN said earlier) then it's the best out there, I've personally seen highly modded GTO's with Prochargers barely break into the 11's, I've seen STS cars run 9's. As far as the heat issue, every turbo kit out there puts the turbos under the car, gets rid of the heat issues. As far as where the power is made, the turbo will have tons more low end torque and higher top end than a centrifigal..... the only down side I can see is the money.
BTW, two identical 04 GTO's, one with STS (8lbs intercooled) another with Procharger (8lbs intercooled), both cars had custom tunes and underdrive pulleys.
Procharger - 440 rwhp 418 rwtq
STS - 481 rwhp 531 rwtq
I've got dyno sheets and cars to prove it........
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
418 Posts
there no centrifugal in the world that can outpower a turbo.. Thats why Turbos are banned in a lot of classes and racing series.
early Indy engine made 800-1000hp out of 80-100 cubic inches using ungodly amounts of turbo boost.

ALL superchargers use the crank to drive them. A typical vortech/ ATI / whipple at 10-12lbs will take 50+hp to turn. Maggies even more.. Turbos take NO power to turn so even if they are otherwise identical the turbo would make 50 extra rwhp. Turboes arent connected to the crank so boost comes in as fast as you can spool it making for incredible low end torque (if sized correctly) yet will stillout power a supercharge on the top end.
Like was stated above, drawback is the cost and complexity of install.

PS: and as for best bang for the buck,,that would be Nitrous..
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
304 Posts
HTRDLNCN said:
there no centrifugal in the world that can outpower a turbo.. Thats why Turbos are banned in a lot of classes and racing series.
early Indy engine made 800-1000hp out of 80-100 cubic inches using ungodly amounts of turbo boost.

ALL superchargers use the crank to drive them. A typical vortech/ ATI / whipple at 10-12lbs will take 50+hp to turn. Maggies even more.. Turbos take NO power to turn so even if they are otherwise identical the turbo would make 50 extra rwhp. Turboes arent connected to the crank so boost comes in as fast as you can spool it making for incredible low end torque (if sized correctly) yet will stillout power a supercharge on the top end.
Like was stated above, drawback is the cost and complexity of install.

PS: and as for best bang for the buck,,that would be Nitrous..
So what's the best turbo out there and cost to install?.........LMK as I'm in the market right now for my '05.

JET
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,356 Posts
AH bull SH*# S Sarge. You cannot let up on -Radio-. That FWD POS would be walked on.


sorry dunno know where that came from. back in my military days I guess.

Seriously steve that is awesome from a 4 cl FWD car. It just sucks you had to get rid of ol' fatbitch.

Anyways back on topic. I drove a STS turboed 04 goat and that thing was wicked torquee. Definetely a good way to go.

BTW Steve - Are they making the rear mounted turbos for the 05's? if so, how is it piped? Does it route both exhaust into one or what?
 
1 - 20 of 65 Posts
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top