Z06 vs GT-R vs 911 Turbo -Road and Track

[TFord]

Dont hurt em' TAG

[Aries]

Originally Posted by chevyforlife

ANY CAR WITH A TURBO CHARGER HAS BOOST LAG!!!
sounds like you dont kno wat your talkin about
and dont criticize my friend for having a different oppinion than you

This isn't true. I owned a 1993 RX7 that was twin turbo'ed from the factory. The turbos were set up sequentialy (sp?). The 1st turbo came on from idle to 4500rpm and then the 2nd turbo took over. With this set up there's no lag at all.

[LS9CamaroSS]

Originally Posted by Aries

This isn't true. I owned a 1993 RX7 that was twin turbo'ed from the factory. The turbos were set up sequentialy (sp?). The 1st turbo came on from idle to 4500rpm and then the 2nd turbo took over. With this set up there's no lag at all.

would the LS9 give better results than a twin turbo though? i mean i know you're generating less boost, but wouldn't it be more even boost than a turbo charger?

[SilverTurtle]

Originally Posted by LS9CamaroSS

would the LS9 give better results than a twin turbo though? i mean i know you're generating less boost, but wouldn't it be more even boost than a turbo charger?

the new blower design on the LS9 is almost as efficient as a turbo setup at providing boost all the way through the powerband... while not technically better, I've always preferred supercharging over turbo charging because I am not a fan of the way turbos a) heat up and b) have to be placed somewhere on the exhaust... I'd rather lose a few ponys at the flywheel and be able to create boost on demand.

[Kyle2k]

Originally Posted by LS9CamaroSS

would the LS9 give better results than a twin turbo though? i mean i know you're generating less boost, but wouldn't it be more even boost than a turbo charger?

No it technically wouldn't be as much power per psi of boost, and same can be said for "even" boost. I have seen engine dynos of lets say, the 335i (twin turbo), which has a flat torque curve starting at like 1800rpm (and when i say flat I mean like, straight line) However, the LS9 doesn't need to be anymore efficient, it is ridiculous all on its own. You need to remember though that the supercharger is hypothetically like another alternator on the car (it takes hp to turn) And when it gets to really high rpms, 75-10o crank hp that could be going into the wheels ends up going into turning the supercharger.

That being said, usually, on applications with really small turbos, boosts tends to drop out like 500 rpms before redline. However, fixing this could be as easy as a small turbo and then a slightly larger one for the top end.


The mistake many people do (except in the case of supras) is 1 really huge turbo on, so you basically don't have boost till 5600rpm, then its a kick in the gut of like 900hp until 8000rpm, and then you end up shifting.

[GTAHVIT]

Originally Posted by SilverTurtle

the new blower design on the LS9 is almost as efficient as a turbo setup at providing boost all the way through the powerband... while not technically better, I've always preferred supercharging over turbo charging because I am not a fan of the way turbos a) heat up and b) have to be placed somewhere on the exhaust... I'd rather lose a few ponys at the flywheel and be able to create boost on demand.

+1

[Kyle2k]

Originally Posted by SilverTurtle

the new blower design on the LS9 is almost as efficient as a turbo setup at providing boost all the way through the powerband... while not technically better, I've always preferred supercharging over turbo charging because I am not a fan of the way turbos a) heat up and b) have to be placed somewhere on the exhaust... I'd rather lose a few ponys at the flywheel and be able to create boost on demand.

I agree with you on heat, but I never looked how STS turbos were set up, you should go to their website and watch the video's of the twin turbo vette's HOLY CRAP! (they are mounted in the back so no heat is in the engine compartment)

Edit: I also prefer the sound of turbo's and don't see the problem with adding exhaust components to the car (I think it saves more weight as well)

[Aries]

Originally Posted by SilverTurtle

the new blower design on the LS9 is almost as efficient as a turbo setup at providing boost all the way through the powerband... while not technically better, I've always preferred supercharging over turbo charging because I am not a fan of the way turbos a) heat up and b) have to be placed somewhere on the exhaust... I'd rather lose a few ponys at the flywheel and be able to create boost on demand.

Definatley agree with that! When I'd run the RX7 hard, I'd have to wait a good 5 minutes before shutting it down just to try and cool the turbo's. Even then, the underhood temps were very high.

[LS9CamaroSS]

Originally Posted by Aries

Definatley agree with that! When I'd run the RX7 hard, I'd have to wait a good 5 minutes before shutting it down just to try and cool the turbo's. Even then, the underhood temps were very high.

well how do you cool a SC? does it use its own oil or does it use the engine oil? does it depend on the type of SC it is? and which is cheaper? i know a super charger adds more weight and such, but it isn't all that much... if you're looking for racing apps though it does make alot of difference... which is why the GT500 didn't do all that well in it's C&D test. they said it pushed the nose hard...

[Kyle2k]

I would recommend looking at the STS website if you want a turbo application that doesnt affect the underhood tempereatures, it is a really unique setup. Furthermore, someone could make the argument that the 8000hp top fuel dragsters use superchargers, but all the stock bodied cars that are anybody in the drag world seem to be switching to turbos. Of course you could always do something crazy unique and do a twincharger setup (a twin screw or roots supercharger being fed by a turbo!)

Edit: all FI applications that I know of, maybe besides the STS turbo setup uses engine oil, I would recommend an oil cooler after a turbo or superchaarge setup though (mini-intercooler for oil)

[chevyforlife]

Originally Posted by Kyle2k

It isnt a matter of opinion it is fact, especially if you notice how some turbo chargers can bring an engines torque curve down (or in lower rpm's). Unless your an idiot and strap a t04z turbo (which doesnt make boost till like 6000rpm's even on v8's) on you shouldn't have any lag. Btw don't complain to me for challenging your ignorant friend.

Also, I'm pretty sure he is capable of defending himself, or atleast trying to when it comes to the turbo lag issue.

haha it doesnt really matter does it? i mean these are cars that have no significance to me so i dont kno why im arguing in the first place.

[DGthe3]

Originally Posted by LS9CamaroSS

well how do you cool a SC? does it use its own oil or does it use the engine oil?

As I understand it, superchargers tend to simply produce less heat. Thats why turbos are in greater need of intercoolers than SC's are

now, I don't know a whole lot about forced induction but here's my logic. Isn't it easier for a SC to provide higher air flow rates? For large engined performance cars, you need 2x-3x the flow rate compared to those on I4's. So you would need a much larger turbo, which increase lag. Plus, (most) superchargers fit well with V type engines.

Oh, and a big reason why top fuel dragsters don't have turbos is that there is no exhaust system to connect them to . . . plus the fuel is still burning as it exits the cylinder. good way to cook a turbo

[BrokenTrans]

the GTR is definitely an impressive car, however I can't get over the paddle shifting. I know it's a great advance in technology and has reached the point where it can outperform human drivers with manual transmissions but I still prefer a car with the latter. Keeps me awake at the wheel on long trips

[Evil Destroyer of Death]

Originally Posted by Aries

Are you kidding me!!!! The GT-R was over 5 seconds a lap faster at the race track than either car!!! WOW!! That's not winning thats a slaughter!!! And faster than an Enzo Ferrari in the slalom, unbelievable. Color me very impressed.

Yes the GT-R does seem to be faster then the Z06 on the track, but is not the Vette's traction limited to those GoodYear F1 S.C. ("granny panties") EMT's? That said is it not true that the GT-R is running on a special Dunlop SP Sport 600 that is basically a road course tire?

I'd sure like to see the the current Z06 be fitted with some serious rubber for accuracy of its track performance abilities.