what are the pro's and cons of a super charger

That video was full of **** for a few reasons......I wont get into all of them. (Note, I own supercharged and turbo'ed vehicles)

But....

It says an advantage of turbos is the fact that it doesnt have parasitic losses because its using spent energy???? Well, thats BS, it takes a significant amount of HP to drive a turbo. People for years claim its 'free' HP.....well its not.

If you dont believe me put a turbo on your vehicle, dont hook up the up pipe and put a few socks in it (to simulate compressor load and prevent overclock)....see how much HP you have.

The video says that SCs are more reliable then turbos....because of fewer parts.
A turbo is as simple as you can get. Take a turbo apart and lay its parts out and do the same with a supercharger (dont forget to include drive belts and pulleys). The reason turbo systems are responsible for more engine failures is due to their relative ease of modifying by the owner. Sure you can put a different drive pulley on a SC but turbos have boost controllers, different gates, intercoolers, BOVs ect. Turbos can also be retro fitted to nearly any vehicle....a SC is typically built for the application. This does not mean that a properly designed turbo system is less reliable OR made the vehicle less reliable.....

The video say turbos can have dangerous boost spikes where SCs do not. Again, a properly designed system with a quality gate placed properly and sized correctly.....no 'dangerous boost spikes'.

(*I could keep going but I digress.....)

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Unmentioned advantages of turbos....

Boost is regulated by gate, not RPM.
This may not be a big deal to most but lets look at someone that races in different locations. If you tune a SC at sea level, lets say 25psi at 8000 rpm, and take it to Bonneville (7.5K and 100 degrees = 10,000' air density). Now you are only making 18-20 (est) psi at the same rpm. BOOOOOOO! Because a turbo is regulated by boost, if you make 25psi at sea level you will also make 25psi at higher altitudes (until the compressor runs out of map).

The single biggest advantage over SC on a bike:

Gear based boost controllers.
Because bikes have a tiny contact patch (standard OEM profile tire) it is easy to blow away your tire. It is INSANE to have 500+ HP in 1st gear on these bikes. Because of a host of gear based boost controllers allows infinite adjustable of how boost comes on, making a bike that makes 500 HP streetable (sounds crazy but true).
-lets see a SC do this.......

Turbos also have expandability, bigger intercoolers, water, controllers, gates.....and so on. Not to mention the turbo unit themselves are considerably cheaper (well, this isnt always true!!!).



Again, I own both turbo and sc vehicles. I love them both......but for bikes turbos have taken a 1000-1 advantage for a reason. I am not saying a good SC wouldnt be cool, and more power to ya if thats the road you want to go.

(*mostly the video just pissed me off, and dont believe everything a nice production video has to say)

~JH
 
Take a chill pill or 2 , never mind better make it 20 :laugh:

I linked it for the basic concepts of how they work that was all :hide: 1 works off the crank with pulleys and 1 uses exhaust :hide:
 
I own a diesel cummins there nothing nicer than to hear that turbo in the morning I wish they made diesel busas lol. A supercharger is nice and the power is always there a turbo you would have to whine up to make 20-25- psi my truck goes to 50 psi but again its a diesel and larger turbo and injectors help but make sure you have supporting mods first cause first thing to go after you boost something is head studs. Only advantage for a supercharger as stated above the power is there
 
The single biggest advantage over SC on a bike:

Gear based boost controllers.
Because bikes have a tiny contact patch (standard OEM profile tire) it is easy to blow away your tire. It is INSANE to have 500+ HP in 1st gear on these bikes. Because of a host of gear based boost controllers allows infinite adjustable of how boost comes on, making a bike that makes 500 HP streetable (sounds crazy but true).
-lets see a SC do this.......

!!).



Again, I own both turbo and sc vehicles. I love them both......but for bikes turbos have taken a 1000-1 advantage for a reason. I am not saying a good SC wouldnt be cool, and more power to ya if thats the road you want to go.



~JH

there are different supercharger designs out there that allow more of this then you know ;)

variable speed super chargers are available and more in design stages with even more control
so maybe the majority has more control but not all ;)
 
I like turbo's for bikes because they're cheaper, easier to install, and kits are readily available for more bikes. I like superchargers because of the instant low end power with no waiting for the turbo to spool up. In the end tho they both get the same job done......give your bike a huge power boost, and make it a helluva fun ride :thumbsup: :bowdown:
 
I think the vid has a lot missing from it but it does give some basic idea's of how things work. Its just dated as both turbo's and superchargers have moved on. On a Busa I can make a 500 bhp daily driver (be it with high octane fuel) that has perfect manners in every gear simply with the use of the ECU editor, We can reduce power by gear. AND it would be as useable as a low boost set up as there will be more boost from idle with a bigger blower not less like a turbo and whatever you do with the throttle will be instant response at any revs. It would be a monster for the street but a controllable monster :)
 
Last edited:
Gear based boost controllers.
Because bikes have a tiny contact patch (standard OEM profile tire) it is easy to blow away your tire. It is INSANE to have 500+ HP in 1st gear on these bikes. Because of a host of gear based boost controllers allows infinite adjustable of how boost comes on, making a bike that makes 500 HP streetable (sounds crazy but true).
-lets see a SC do this.......

You don't need to adjust boost per gear to limit power with a blower because you can adjust timing per gear to limit power. Very high horsepower blower cars running small tire classes have been doing this forever.

Here is a video to illustrate. This is a 3000+hp, screw blown Outlaw 10.5 car. PSI D and C rotor screw blowers make in excess of 55psi of boost AT THE HIT. To maintain traction, timing is pulled in first gear for a set period of time to limit power. After that set period of time, timing is ramped back in. Typically, depending on tire size, at least 17 degrees of timing is pulled with a PSI screw at the hit. You can clearly see and hear timing being ramped back in about 200 feet out or so as the car "comes to life".

 
Last edited by a moderator:
power isn't always "there" with a supercharger....blower doesnt build boost until you really get on the gas....you can actually give it throttle and still not be building boost.
 
pros lots of fun
cons lots of fun with lots of tickets haha

supercharger always on power its always there but it takes power to make power

turbo has a big of lag especially at low rpm's but creates more power
 
pros lots of fun
cons lots of fun with lots of tickets haha

supercharger always on power its always there but it takes power to make power

turbo has a big of lag especially at low rpm's but creates more power


Turbos may not take power to turn like a blower, but they do create a restriction in the exhaust. You can lessen this restriction to a point with larger a/r ratio turbine housings, but in turn you increase lag.

As far as bikes go and the available packaging space, turbos are making more peak power than the currently available blowers. In cars, screw blowers are the kings of power, especially average power.
 
superchargedv8, with my Rotrex kits power IS always there it makes boost from idle and builds progressively to redline. If your cruising at 2k in top and crack the throttle there is an instant progressive build up in accelaration, no lag whatsoever, obviously if you want to get a move on you knock it down a couple of gears and with the drop into higher revs there is instantly more boost available. The power to drive these superchargers is remakably low at around 7-8% but this is offset by the better than stock efficiency even from idle. For instance my Audi V8 conversions return 10-15% better fuel consumption then stock when criusing around off boost, obviously if you use the boost you use the fuel but have a lot of fun.
 
Superchargedv8, you should check out the specs and products for rotrex superchargers on this site TTS Homepage I've been researching bike kit superchargers for almost a year from different companies before deciding to buy one from tts performance. Big CC makes a kit but there chargers use traditional gears vs. rotrex's planetary gearing...the ratio is 10:1 so the power/boost IS always there although it is progressive, another reason I chose a SC. A centrifugal charger is way more efficient than Roots and Screw types. The SC market for bikes is steadily improving and I believe will become OEM on upcoming bikes.
 
After a certain rpm, the rotors in a screw blower go centrifugal where efficiency can exceed 100%. Screws power the quickest and fastest door slammers in the world. A claim centrifugals can't make.
 
By the way, it was mentioned you can't control boost with a blower like you can with a turbo. You can actually. In addition to controlling power with timing, you can control boost via a blow off valve with a centrifugal blower. Car guys use boost controllers to control blow off valves similarly to turbo guys using boost controllers to control wastegates.
 
Eddie, I guess I should clarify my reply...centrifugal SC FOR BIKES are more efficient/practical, however planetary geared centrifugals are becoming popular in the auto world because of the compactness, power ratio's, robustness and less loss of efficiency due to friction. We know cars and their performance mods are decades ahead of bike technology, case in point...compare the time auto's have been using fuel injection vs. bikes. SC for bike's is a viable power adder but still underrated thus not as much R&D as turbo's @ the moment.
 
That I agree with. While bikes have made great strides in the last decade or two, they are still beyond compared to cars. I also agree there is far more R&D for turbos compared to blowers with regards to bikes. Blowers are coming around, though.
 
I'm not into turbos or superchargers, as gearing down to 2nd at 70mph and wacking the throttle is already enough to make me almost "p" my pants.

I did a lot of work regarding this way back though with some involvement into the early formula 1 cars before the turbo ban in 1989, where they tapped more than 1,000hp from a 1.5 l motor.

The biggest difference between a turbo and a supercharger is that the power losses to drive a supercharger comes from the crank, while with a turbo the only losses are exhaust back pressure. The latter is not a big deal, as there is a huge pressure drop over the turbo, thus causing a proportional temperature drop (gas contracts as it loses temperature) which counteracts the back-pressure. Differently put, some of the power is derived from heat of the expanding exhaust gasses, counteracting the power lost due to back pressure. In fine design, critical exhaust flow also enters the equation.

In short, a properly designed turbo will always be more efficient than a supercharger.
 
Back
Top