I'm thinking about actualy purchasing one of the turbos for the 8. What do you guys think I should get the Speed For(ce) Racing one or the SSR Engineering kit or should I go with a Supercharger? Which would be better and realible?

 

I think the SFR one is the same one SSR was developing. Personally, I'm waiting on the Hymee S/C.

 

I'm thinking of going with the ATI procharger.

 

It would be daft of you to get anything else, since he said he was going to GIVE you one :P

 

its waaaaay too early for anyone here to know anything firsthand, you cant even buy those kits yet.

there's million threads on turbo vs supercharger though

 

Well this is his thread, so it's not really a repost, but you're pretty damn close to the sePort picture Horse.

Seriously, neither a supercharger is better than a turbo, or vice-versa. How much and what kind of powerband are you looking for?

 

On a car like this, in my opinion the supercharger is just more practical. The lag you experience from turbos is not appealing on a car with little to no low end power. But then again technology has really helped to eliminate turbo lag, so we'll see what happens. And about reliability, i don't remember who said it or in what thread but it was something along the lines of "the turbo/supercharger is as reliable as it's user" Just take care of your car and you shouldn't have any reliability problems.

 

is that speed force and ssr the same?! hey buy the way ...I think supercharger can keep the property of 8(smooth nice and easy).but turbo can give u more power.. need for speed?! go for turbo. dude.. after it installed in ur car.. (should u mod the exhaust too?) I don't think the stock exhast fix!! watever ... just keep update man..!! I need to know about ur ..super 8!! haha.. probably supercharge is more reliable than turbo.?! just a thought. I'm not really sure about how reliable ssr's turbo does!? but 13b(FD's) has many problems with it. actually is not the very problem with the design it's the problem with the driver. but nvm.. it's not really matter.. just keep ur mind on the car.. if there is some thing un-normal. try to find out the problem before it get worst. then every will just be fine..!!

 

Are you okay dude? Like I said, none is greater than the other. It depends on your preference. Horse, you should take some time to learn more about forced induction. If you're not mechanically inclined, check out Corky Bell's books. If you are, you can get some literature from SAE, or a book on compressible flow.

BTW, I believe SSR is working in conjunction SFR.

 

Hmmz reliability = supercharger , turbos need a **** load of maintenance , if you don't keep up its screwed ..... thats why superchargers are in benz's and crap , you just drive it , no maintenance needed. Turbos need to be warmed down before they can be shut off with a turbo timer and other crap .... lotsa maintenance,

Power = turbo , I know people are saying it's going to smooth out the power with a supercharger ,but you can do alot more with a turbo than a supercharger , you can upgrade turbos and stuff with a turbo charger ,but superchargers you can only upgrade the sprockets, and at some point you can't go any faster. Besides that you get bored of a supercharger faster .... you hit the gas and it's there, on a turbo on the other hand , you have to wait for it to spool up ... that means you never get bored of it ...

put it this way

You drive a car that has amazing torque .... you feel it all the time ... you get jaded within time because you are so use to hitting the gas and the power is already there

Get a turbo on the other hand , you NEVER get bored of it , cause the power only comes in later, and not always like driving around town...

So it comes down to personal preferance .... they both make about the same amount of power yep ... better power = turbo because of its upgrades tho ..... the turbos are exhaust driven = more better flowing exhaust = more hp , also have room for intercoolers and BOV and all those other goodies.

Superchargers on the other hand (depending what type like screw or w/e) , most of them can't be upgraded that much , just sprockets , and thats about it.


Hope this explains it all .... coming from a youngin it probably means nothing to you ... but thats ok 8)
edit: crap nvm! your 1 year younger than me ! lol

 

Well I heard Turbo's are too new and they are still blowing up engines.

Wait awhile. I'm interested in the return of the Latham Axial Screw Turbo.

From what I read it sounds like its the best application for the RX8, not to mention weight and price should be alot cheaper too.

 

Speed Force Racing is developing the turbo system...

SSR is the advertising/promotion company that will eventually carry this product Speed Force Racing puts out....

 

BS, BS, BS. What is providing the forced induction in Audi, VW, Porsche, Ford, some Mercedes models, etc. etc. etc.?????? Turbochargers. It's completely untrue and utter nonsense to suggest that just because it's a turbo it needs a huge amount of maintenance. Further, most or all production turbo systems are water cooled, and do not require cool down periods. The maintenance requirements are IDENTICAL.

When you're talking aftermarket kits, then it comes down to who designed the kit and how well designed it is. In the Miata world, the SC kits tend to require more maintenance only because of belt alignment and replacement issues. The turbo kits are bulletproof.

Regards,
Gordon

PS - I have a twin-turbo V6 Audi in my garage for the past 2.5 years. It goes for routine oil changes, that's all. Never had a single problem or issue with it.

 

turbo chargers put out alot more heat dude , in the long run , a turbo is gonna die before a supercharger. I've seen audi TT's and eclipse GST's turbo's go before a mercedes supercharger.


Also , say you've just been at a track the whole day, with a turbo , your definitely going to have to let it idle for a while , cause even the watercooled turbos are going to have to cool down , superchargers you don't really have to, but I'd reccomend it ... and I'm talking about maintnance and durability when you abuse the car atleast once a week racing or something. Yes there are poorly designed superchargers as there are poorly designed turbos, but bottom line a supercharger is gonna need less maintenance after a couple of track days.

But over all most turbo's need more maintenance , theres gotta be some exceptions like you said, but I personally think supercharger is easier to install and maintain.


heres a link for some facts ...
http://www.superchargersonline.com/content.asp?ID=19

 

Both need probably just as much maintenance as the other. Remember that webpage is supercharger biased. Both superchargers and turbochargers are compressors, therefore they both generate heat. Just because you have a turbocharger doesn't mean your car is engine is going to fail faster, nor does it mean it's going to last forever. Your conception of turbochargers reflects that of the 1980's. You of all people should know better than that titaniumgrey.

Also, superchargers and turbochargers perform the same function, so wouldn't they require similar maintenance? Just some food for thought.

 

Y34h, m4n, 1 kn0w wh47 j00 4r3 74!k1ng 4b0u7!!!!1111!!!!11!?!?!?

I totally get bored with my microwave when I'm cooking my TV dinner, cause it's like INSTANT cooking. I much prefer my oven that takes time to warm up, then 15 FULL minutes to cook. That is AWESOME, D000D. Lag rules, like when you are playing COUNTERSTRIKE. I LOVE it when I am trying to shoot someone and they disappear and kill me. I never get bored with it because I never know when the lag will make me go slower! It's like, I used to play LAN games where there was no lag, but then I realized how bored I was with being good ALL the time. So, now I only play over a 56K modem!!!

Sorry. Your post garbled my mind, so I had to give you a hard time about it. But it was all in good fun. No hard feelings.

 

Just seems like turbo's fail more than superchargers from what I've seen , but thats just my personal thought, but thats just maybe wrong. Can't find any proof so far though.


and robert lol, its pretty simple , you love a supercharged car for the testdrive and drive it for a week and your probably gonna get bored of it within a while cause the power is always there. The power is just there, you get jaded by it, turbo's your gonna have to wait for the spool so you an't gonna get jaded , you get it ?

Think of it this way, I didn't explain it this way but the guy at S n l tuning explained it to me and my friends, people usually think fast as when they hit the gas, so they are like oh man i'm faster , i'm faster, but what happens when you feel that "i'm faster" all the time ?

A supercharger is like having a hot girlfriend ALL the time, after a while, she an't hot anymore ....



With a turbo you don't feel it all the time , so its like the girl puts on make up and looks good , so you won't get bored of her s sometimes :D , hope I don't offend any girls here


Understand ?

If this wasn't true about how torquey cars get boring after a while ... I wouldn't see so many people trading in corvettes for STI's , not saying the STI has no torque, but it just has that turbo feel.

 

guys thanks for the help, but I understand all the maintenance issues and power issues, and etc. My questions are more about the products and companies, ie) the realibility of SFR or SSR or ATI, not as much Turbo vs SC even though that is a question in it's own. When it comes down to it since mine is a everyday driver, and I have another track specific car, I'm not sure I'm willing to go with the SSR & SFR which aren't as popular as others such as Blitz and Greddy, where the name and product has been used and proven to be street realiabile before. I've designed a setup using those used by sunflower, ssr & SFR. I don't have the equipment to perform the extensive modifications needed for a turbo, but using the ATI universal kit could fab my own SC. So has anyone used ATI products are they realiable?

 

I’m not being an *** dot but have you ever owned a turbo charged car? I, along with many of the members on here own a 3 gen and have been involved in these forums (rx7club.com, Robinette, ect.) for years, we have seen plenty of your type. I’m sure you, with all of you glorious knowledge, know all about the amazing exhaust gas velocities of the rotary engine, you better back me up on this one rotary god. Knowing this, I don't understand why you still refuse to believe that a turbo is an excellent choice for forced induction on this engine. Maybe I should educate you.

HEAT..
A well planned and designed turbo system produces about the same charge temps as an equivalently sized s/c. Don’t believe me, do some research. The use of a v-mount, or front mount in the case of the 8, drastically reduces the amount of heat.

POWER..
Increasing power on a supercharger requires changing the main drive pulley. Changing the power on a turbo system requires pressing a button on your preset boost controller. I cruse around town at 8 to 10 psi, when the time is right, I press the button and v-wallah, 15 psi. It's that easy.

RELIABILITY..
You’re right with one part though, simplicity. Although, installing a s/c would require exactly the same amount of tuning and upgrading on the electrical side, you would have less piping and such though. This is why you buy a well-made turbo kit. If you can install a s/c and the required supporting upgrades (coils, computer, injectors, whatever else the kit would include), than you would have no problem installing a well built turbo kit. How do I know, I have done both several times.

LAG..
First off, don't listen to every jackass that wants to defend the 80's line of thought. Turbo is not synonymous with lag. Not in our world anyhow. Rotaries produce amazing exhaust velocities. This is why the Renesis can spool a T-78 with no problem. Throw that on a 4 banger and see what happens. I'll save you the time, not much. An appropriately sized turbo on an 8, such as an Apexi-Rx6, could easily get you somewhere around 400hp at the wheels, with proper tuning and supporting electronics (not yet available for the 8 but soon to come, I promise), and have almost no lag. Turbos have come along way. Plus, you think your supercharger is going to make full boost by 1500 rpms and somehow hold that same pressure all the way to the 8's redline. Maybe the technology has come as far as turbos have but in the last supercharged rotary I saw, that wasn't the case.

THE 3RD GEN. RX7
I think most of the people on here that trash turbos for reliability are speaking out of ignorance due to the "Rx7 Experience". The turbos on the Rx7 were sequential. That’s short for pain in the ***, over complicated, but beautifully designed, lagless turbos. I'll save you the explanation on how they work, you probably already know. The problem with them was in the control system, that was Mazda’s fault. Hundreds of vacuum hoses and lots of heat is a bad combination. The control systems would fail, primarily the hose leading to the primary wastegate. This failure would allow the turbos to boost uncontrollably, many motors were lost even though Mazda engineered in a fuel cut somewhere between 11 and 12 psi. A single turbo eliminates this problem by greatly simplifying the control system. I have run a single for almost 4 years, daily, and problem free.

FINALLY..
I don't want you to think that I hate s/c'ers as much as you hate turbos. I don't. Supercharges have their place in the automotive world. Turbos will never replace blowers on top fuel dragsters. As far drivability goes in a street driven rotary rocket, I feel the turbo will never be replaced. Its just better suited for this application. You may feel differently but I promise, there’s a reason all of us went with big singles back in the mid to late 90's, they work great.

 

uh, because of the rules, nothing else.

this whole versus thing is so old. it's down to compressor efficiency, advantages on the mechanical side with implementation, and the actual funtionality of the unit. when you guys stop trying to pretend to understand how the stuff works and learn what's going on you'll realize that they are actually exactly the same thing with slightly different approaches.

turbos are supers that use turbines instead of a belt, which is in many ways a slicker way to motivate the compressor (as the speed is dependant on throttle position and rpm, not just rpm alone... tons of advantages).

using a supercharger which isn't driven off of the exhaust can offer many advantages when it comes to real world engineering problems (:o o noes!! not teh reel wrld!!), like packaging and servicability.

broad statements like "superchargers last longer than turbochargers" makes about as much sense as "blue is a higher number than table". whose supercharger? whose turbocharger? (they're not all the same, y'know). under what conditions? what's first to give on either? what's the last thing to go on either? etc etc etc. turbos don't "give off more heat", 'cause exhaust manifolds are still there whether you have a supercharger or not; a more correct statment would be that higher horsepower motors give off much more heat than low horsepower motors.

relax, give it a rest, and realise that this is a really dumb discussion.

 

93silverFD I'm not sure what I did to burst your bubble. And Wakeech it may be a dumb discussion to you but I am interested in the opinions of the sompanies and products used by others out there so to me it is as important to any other. Back to 93silverFD When I siad, if you were directing yourself towards me, I meant the SC was better in my situation because I can't fab my own turbo. If tomorrow Trust released one for a good price I would be all over it, I love turbos. And I'm sure it's great for this car besides the fact that Mazda put in light weight rotors for the 8s and they can only take small amounts of boost I think I heard somewhere between 6 and 9 lbs, unlike those in the FDs it's not the fact it's a rotary as many claim it's the design of the particular engine that the 8 has which makes it a challenge but a worthy one. Oh yeah the Turbo v. SC battle can end, this was not the intention of this discussion. Who has used either of the company products I mentioned in the thread and how are they? ie) any SFR or SSR performance product or any ATI SC.

 

Light weight rotors have nothing to do with the amount of boost your motor can take. A semi popular modification done to these motors is milling the rotors down in an effort to reduce reciprocating mass, thats a positive. Compression on the other hand, is another story. The amount of boost this motor can take is only limited by what the motor can physically handle (plunty), and what the person (and software) tuning the vehicle is capable of. When all the electronics bs is finally worked out on this car there should be no reason we cant see 15psi on 93, 20 plus on C16. Especially when Cam or someone else figures out just how much to mill off those rotor faces to drop the compression a point. BTW, my post wasn't directed at you, rather the people on here constantly spouting **** they have no idea about.

 

To address your question about the kits available; I'm sure all of the kits being produced (none to my knowledge are ready) are of fair quality. The problem with super-charging or turbo-charging your vehicle lies in the tuning and installation. There is no way they can ship out the kit and have it come with a little black box that is perfectly tuned for their kit. Aftermarket turbo systems always require dyno time if you want good, safe ratios. Unless the kit produces very little boost. If I was you I would wait till SSR finished their turbo kit and buy that. It doesn’t produce a lot of power but it is capable of tons. Then when someone comes out with a decent programmable computer, buy it along with the supporting fuel upgrades and have the car tuned for 15 psi. Of course, for simplicities sake, I’m sure you would be fine cruising around town at 7 pounds.

 

Hey.. SSR said they will produce a system that achieves 100 whp and 95 additional tq and thats not a lot? Geez.. you have pretty high expectations... I would be happy with 50 whp/tq....

 

Im sure they are talking flywheel. Like 280-290 hp at the wheels, which is nothing to wink at by the way, but still not an 11 second car. I could be wrong, and please correct me if I am, but I thought their kit only pumped out between 6 and 7 psi. At those boost levels, theres no way you would be breaking the 300hp mark. 290 at the rear wheels is no joke though, with a good driver, im sure thats high 12's, low 13's.