| Author | Topic |
|---|
Location:
geelong
Registered:
September 2002
|
|
Re: supercharge or turbo
|
Sat, 11 December 2004 12:55
 
|
 |
feel free to correct me if i'm wrong as i'm only relaying what i've been told.
but my understanding of the two (difference wise)
is that the turbo won't kick in till around 3-4 grand, so that on a fast take-off, you have the first part of that power using your engine naturally aspired. (until it kicks in)
whereas a supercharger, whilst it's heavier and whilst it takes power from your car's engine to get it going, it does however kick in straight away.
therefore, if you aim were to take cars off at the lights, you'd assume the supercharger would be the go, yeah? nah?
|
|
|
| | Subject | Poster | Date |
|---|
 |
supercharge or turbo
|
kdogg | Fri, 10 December 2004 00:22 |
|
Re: supercharge or turbo
|
ra23celica | Fri, 10 December 2004 00:39 |
|
Re: supercharge or turbo
|
kdogg | Fri, 10 December 2004 02:50 |
|
Re: supercharge or turbo
|
Rex_Kelway | Sat, 11 December 2004 01:25 |
|
Re: supercharge or turbo
|
fade-e | Sat, 11 December 2004 03:14 |
|
Re: supercharge or turbo
|
dimmy77_03 | Sat, 11 December 2004 03:20 |
|
Re: supercharge or turbo
|
chutz_pah | Sat, 11 December 2004 12:55 |
|
Re: supercharge or turbo
|
fade-e | Sat, 11 December 2004 13:40 |
