The Nissan and Infiniti Enthusiasts Site
Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 39

Thread: Supercharger vs Turbocharger write up

  1. #1

    Supercharger vs Turbocharger write up

    HD: I've opened this thread back up and merged any follow-up posts so we fine-tune this collection of thoughts into a final post that weighs the pros and cons of each type of forced induction and give the reader more information to help them determine what's best for them, not what the "best" or most popular kit out there! I'll be clearning this thread as needed to try and keep it more streamlined. If necessary, we'll do a complete re-write once we can come to agreement on both sides!


    the advantages of a supercharger is it's simpler than a turbo

    less piping- less chance of leaks

    boost isn't controlled by a boost controller that CAN go bad/malfunction/pick up wrong readings and shoot an extra 1-3 lbs of boost in the engine. Superchargers boost is controlled by the pulley belt - more mechanical, less electronic - impossible to get boost spikes really unless it's from the ECU advancing timing or something crazy - which can happen on turbos as well

    500 hp is plenty to go fast anyway which is possible with a SC - more even. If you want more get a twin turbo or a different car

    there's more traction with the centrifical superchagers - vortech, ATI, HKS (stillen is a roots type) because the boost builds up gradually instead of handing all of it to you instantly at 3500rpm's like a turbo will. - torque is similar too. It all hits at 4000rpm's and looks like a mountain peak on the dyno instead of being even and flat. Of course not everyone's turbo car's dyno looks like that - depends on the parts used and how it's tuned, but that is what is typical

    Flatter torque curves are easier to control - so in some ways superchargers will help the Z handle better. Less likely you'll get wheel spin and crash. Turbos have lag. The Z doesn't have much lag, but it has it, it's much more noticable with the single turbo kits compared to the twins. You can actually see the lag take shape in the dyno curves with the single turbos. Regardless of kit If you graphed boost pressure alone though, you'd see it spike up quickly around 3k rpms or so depending on the kit. You CAN feel that and it DOES have an effect on how the car drives

    superchargers don't get anywhere as hot as turbos

    superchargers work great with just about all NA mods. The centrifical ones should work great with the 3.9 gears and headers etc.

    having all major breathing mods with a supercharger will actually put less stress on the engine with less friction than a stock engine with a turbo blowing air in faster thru a more restrictive air path

    typically superchargers are much easier on the engine's internals than a turbo. It wears out the bearings more, but they're up to the task. The rods however aren't super strong. General rule of thumb with turbos is that more power hits harder faster which can cause stuff to break.

    People might say turbos are more efficient and you get more power for your money - and that's all true, but you still gotta make the decision if you actually DO want that power because these engines aren't bombproof in the way factory FI engines are

    Every time you shift on a turbo you'll get a surge of torque power and could likely spin out the tires (can crash even) because the rpms drop down to where peak torque is. On a SC that doesn't happen - not as much wheel spin when shifting. Having the big torque every time you shift though is part of the fun of having a turbo. In a way though it's an illusion of speed because when you're shifting you're not giving it gas, then when you shift BAM and you're thrown back in your seat. It's much more dramatic than on a SC. But unless you have tires up to the task to keep from spinning tires it can actually hurt your accelleration overall. When people brag about having so much power that they spin out the tires all over the place, it usually means something about their car setup isn't up to the task to maintain balance - tires, LSD, how hard the torque hits vs the traction threshold etc need to work together to get the fastest overall performance - like around a road course or thru winding roads etc.





    now the bad stuff about superchargers

    belt noise - gotta check/tightent belts every couple weeks. Belt changes happen twice as often. If you get a gates belt, you will tighten it about 3 times during the first couple weeks, then that's pretty much it. Noises at idle can go away by raising the idle rpm's to around 1000 though

    not as much torque. The curve is flatter, but there's much less of it. However get some 3.9 gears and that just about makes up for it anyway. Not only that, but get a light clutch/flywheel also - and with centrifical SC's you'll zoom into the torque faster towards redline. On a turbo with a light clutch/flywheel, you'll actually be zooming away from your peak torque since it's more in the middle of the rpm's.

    To get more power, you gotta buy a smaller pulley, upgrade the blower unit itself, add more breathing mods, or increase timing/fuel quality - more expensive than simply dialing in higher boost.





    turbos are more fun in a lot of ways because of how hard the boost hits and how much torque it quickly builds up. On the street a turbo will easily feel much much more powerful since you'll be in the power band the whole time. Better for drag racing usually because it has such high torque - assuming you have drag radials/slicks you WILL launch harder than with a SC (though SC's can just rev higher anyway to help lessen the gap if they're also running race tires) On the street with normal street tires I'd actually say the turbo will be more likely to be sitting still spinning tires while a supercharged car will already be taking off, then the turbo car will start closing the gap and then even passing the SC car given it's a long enough run. On the highway the turbo dominates over the SC

    Superchargers are more for people who like to throw the car around corners and keep the overall balance of the car with still adding more power





    Stillen makes a great kit though. The stage 4 sounds pretty decent. I don't mind the new hood that has the scoop. The stillen basically amplifies the stock power levels all the way thru. Meaning it has great low and mid range, but up high towards redline it starts losing steam. However around town it'll feel much more like a monster.

    IMO the stillen is a great kit to go with by itself or with some minor breathing mods. The vortech and ATI kits are the better choice if you're really going to invest some money into the car (cams, gears, headers, clutch etc) Go with a turbo though if you want the biggest thrill, but probably less reliability - many people claim they have 10's of thousands of miles on their turbo and usually they're FI buffs who know what they're doing anyway. Really it's too early to know because people with every kit will claim their car is running perfectly even if it's only been driven for 5 miles. All camps have people with 40k miles on their particular FI kit. Seems like usually the difference is in how well YOU maintain your car cause FI will need it.

  2. #2

    continued...

    the other thing about superchargers vs turbos is say you're cruising along the streets and decide to give it a little more gas - not full throttle or even half throttle, but like around 25% more throttle - the supercharger will immediately give you more power, the turbo won't. Not until you give it enough throttle to spool up the turbo




    as far as the ATI kit - it's a great kit. The things about it I really like are the CAI and the non slip belt design.

    What I don't like about it is the price. The full kit is like $5500 or whatever. The tuner kit though, isn't much less. Like $5000


    The full vortech kit though is priced about the same, but the tuner kit is like $3600. It's also much quieter from what I've heard people say. People have said you can hear the ATI 2 miles away it's so loud and will eclipse your Z's exhaust sound.

    The bit about the self lubricating oil.... It's a mixed bag really. What it means is when you change your oil you just have 2 oils to change with the ATI, not one. Ok so that's not a huge deal really. I'm not sure if you have to use ATI's oil or if you can use regular oil. Anyway with the vortech kit, if you have an oil temp gauge, then you can actually get a temp reading for the engine AND the blower. You probably want to get an oil cooler and possibly one of those APS oil pans for the baffles to make sure you don't get oil starvation - and heat fins and it holds a little more oil too. People have said so far it hasn't been that big of a deal sharing the oil but the main problem is if the supercharger overheated or had an oil leak - you could not just lose the supercharger, but the engine as well - hence you should get an oil temp gauge and watch the oil pressure levels - watch ALL your gauges and extra gauges to stay safe.

    the thing I like about the vortech is how upgradable it is. Vortech offers smaller pullies and bigger blowers. I don't think ATI has bigger blowers. They have smaller pullies though. The ATI kit is better suited for going over 400hp in stock form - it's within it's design to do it. The vortech isn't, but several people are going over 400hp with no issues so it does seem to hold it. Besides, if you're going big on power and you blow up the blower you'd probably just replace it with one of the bigger blowers anyway. The vortech has a bigger fan blade and pipe diameter but doesn't have as much pressure compared to the ATI - which could possibly mean less friction and less heat than ATI. Oh and there seems to be tons of people going with vortech's now. Stillen probably a close 2nd. ATI next and HKS last. So the stillen and vortech kits will have lots of online support


    The HKS kit is great and probably higher quality than vortech or ATI and stillen. However its intercooler wouldn't be up for heavy track driving since it's like 1/3 of the normal size. It's not upgradeable at all and HKS does not give you any room for other power mods. You probably could use your own standalone and fuel system though. I've heard the blower unit is more advanced than any of the blowers for the Z - it has more torque but works like the ATI/vortech with building boost. I've heard HKS might not really be supporting the kit or offering it anymore though - maybe it's not true, but someone did say they no longer can find info about it on their site - someone tell me i'm wrong?

    As far as the stillen kit, it's great too just in different ways. Going with mods that give top end power and remove low end power are the best way to even out the powerband across all the rpm's. It could be harder to launch a stillen SC Z than a vortech/ATI with normal street tires. With race tires, you'll shoot way off the line compared to the ATI/vortech, but later the ATI/vortech will probably pass you.

    If you look at dyno charts and realize that a manual Z with normal gearing, will drop to around just over 5k rpms when shifting at redline. It faces the same issue the turbos face with torque because the stillen's torque starts dropping at 5k. So when you shift you get more torque then it drops as you reach redline. So if you are flooring the car, the vortech/ATI kits will absolutely win over the stillen because you will be in the 5000-6600 rpm range when redlining and shifting at redline which is where the ATI/vortech kits really start hammering out some torque. So for the daily driving where you stay below 5000 rpms, the stillen is awesome. But if you get into a WOT battle with a vortech/ATI kit (or of course a turbo Z) you'll quickly start losing.


    I'm just talking in general terms here but I actually think with race tires, the stillen kit is awesome for autox. The vortech/ATI kits would do well at autox too (again 3.9 gears and light clutch are vortech/ATI's friends - could easily outdo the stillen with them). Turbos would do horrible at autox. You have to react too quick. You'd never get your boost and when you do it's too much too fast and you'll lose control

    for drag racing, the turbos would win, ATI/vortech 2nd, and the stillen last.

    for full track road courses it depends on the course with how many straights there are and how long they are. Generally though IMO the vortech/ATI will be the best, the others will all do well but probably not as good. Keep in mind that turbos will be the first to overheat later in the day. And you're not going very fast when you're sitting waiting for the car to cool off or if you're leaving early for the day because of overheating. I do think though, that if you spend the big money on ALL the needed parts - big brakes, big tires, cooling and more cooling, and lots of tuning to even out the power curves as much as possible, I think the turbo cars have the potential to kill the ATI/vortech, but it's big money and you probably gotta be a damn good driver and really know the car.


    Just an aside, everyone has been making big deals out of the JWT kit lately on other boards, but if you look at the torque level, it's marginally better than a well setup vortech/ATI kit between 5000-5600 rpms and the hp level is about dead even - with stock boost levels because of how the JWT kit starts losing serious steam past 5k rpms - even more of a dramatic drop than the stillen kit. So in this regard, I see the JWT kit as a more dramatic stillen kit.

  3. #3

    Re: supercharger vs turbocharger write up

    interesting read. A lot of your statements are merely opinions, but I agree with a lot of points you brought out. A solid base for some interesting discussion. Thanks and welcome to the forum.

  4. #4

    Re: supercharger vs turbocharger write up

    thanks, palmerwmd asked me to start this thread here. I suppose there's some things that I could revise on it, but I'll let other people hash it out

    what things came off as opinions? I suppose it's impossible to have anything be a fact. No matter what you say in relative to something else, someone is always out there to disagree


    either way, this car has a wide range of good FI choices and ways to set up the car. The VQ is a well rounded engine that makes the type and brand of FI a difficult choice. It's all going to come down to how much you want to spend and what type of driving is important to you. It took me a year and a half to arrive at my FI decision for my car

  5. #5

    Re: supercharger vs turbocharger write up

    I would go single turbo if I ever went FI. You may get a little bit of turbo lag... but you also are not getting HP robbed from the crank at early RPMs... plus I kinda like the turbo "kick" when it spools up

    IMO... a turbo charger is just cooler too ... sounds like a bad ass when blowing and virtually silent early on.

  6. #6
    Senior Administrator palmerwmd's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2002
    Location
    Maryland
    Posts
    14,078

    Re: supercharger vs turbocharger write up

    Sentry brings up some good perspectives here!

    And I wanted it here because, it brings out some different perspectives in contrast to the now dominant Turbo-owns-all school of thought.

    Great Job!
    Stickied and closed.

    Fred..

    PS: We Can Start a seperate discussion about this thread with original thoughts ina seperate thread if members wish.

  7. #7

    supercharger vs turbocharger followup

    PS: We Can Start a seperate discussion about this thread with original thoughts ina seperate thread if members wish.


    After reading through, there are a lot of points that were brought up, but not all are necessarily correct, and like Deathmage pointed out, based mostly on opinion. I don't think there's a "Turbo-owns-all school of thought" per se, except for the big balls group who need to flash their wallet or brag about high hp!

    I've been reading Maximum Boost by Corky Bell, and I think its a worthwhile read for anybody considering FI. More important, the a lot of topics that are raised in the book are applicable to any form of FI. I don't think you can do a fair comparison of turbochargers to superchargers without knowing as much info as possible. Otherwise you end up in one of the camps just throwing rocks at the other. I'm not here to run to the defense of turbos, I just want to give some more indepth consideration to some of the ideas tackled.

    There's no denying that tractable lower horsepower can be faster than a high horsepower vehicle. If you read C/D's RSX Challenge, or more pertinently, Speed Magazines 350Z FI Shootout article, you'll see that the cars with lower HP peak output, but better capability of applying it to the ground turned out better 0-60 and 1/4 miles times relative to their power output. I think anybody that throws FI on a bone stock vehicle is putting the cart before the horse because you really want your vehicle as capable as possible to handle the power.

    Most notable that in Speed Magazine's shootout, they brought a NA car (stock engine) with 3.9 gearing. It wasn't allowed to officially compete because it had Hoosier's and not street tires. Only mods were performance mods Nismo exhaust, 8 lb Tilton flywheel/clutch package, 3.917:1 gearing and a Nismo LSD. Also had a StopTech 4 wheel brake kit, Nismo suspension, Nismo 18" wheels and 245/40 and 275/35 Hoosier tires. With all that, the car pulled in the fastest track time (by over a second) and was within reach of the FI cars in acceleration tests.

    With that in mind, the 3.9 final drive gearing you mentioned, can still be much for a lot of FI 6MT drivers, particularly on the street. The 6 speed's close gearing means you're changing gears more rapidly during acceleration and won't hit 20 mph at 4k rpm. I think 5AT owners who have upgraded valve bodies are better off considering swapping out their rear-end for the 3.9, but thats a personal preference.



    The point about dangerous wheel slip that could cause a spinout on every shift is absurd. The concept that 500 whp is any less streetable than 350 whp is totally dependent on the driver, not the car. There are people who will crash the car on improper driving techniques on a stock vehicle. If that were truly the case, guys like Eagle1 would never get his car around the first turn of the track! If you're going to make the point that a turbo powered car is too unstable at every upshift because it falls into the peak torque range, the same would apply to the supercharged cars at every downshift as they're thrown into their peak power range. Its all driver technique.

    When it comes to mods designed for a naturally aspirated engine vs forced induction, there is no advantage to if you're running a turbo or supercharger. Once you get past the throttle body, FI is FI. At that point, it doesn't where your 8 psi of boost comes from, what matters is the temperature of the intake charge, exhaust backpressure, etc... Basically, what is good for a SC is good for a turbo. The main difference on effect of mods between the 2 systems is backpressure. If you have about 3 psi of backpressure in your exhaust system, your intake charge PSI is effectly reduced by that amount. With a CSC, you still make boost at a linear rate, just at a lower overall rate. With a turbo, it takes a higher engine RPM to reach the boost threshold where the turbo starts to make boost, and your peak boost levers are lowered.

    A common misconception is "lag" on turbos. Its key to consider the definitions of lag, boost threshold and throttle response.

    Lag - Lag is the delay between a change in throttle and the associated change in boost.
    Boost threshold - The lowest engine RPM in which boost is made over atmospheric pressure
    Throttle response - A change in engine speed due to a change in throttle position.

    Being that the Z/G have electronically controlled throttles, there isn't that delay when you hit the gas compared to cars with cable driven throttle bodies. Newer turbos don't have have the lag of older designs, and a properly thought out kit should have a compressor of the right size to maximize peak output with low boost threshold. Response should be minimal, but CSC's do have an advantage that as soon as the engine speed changes, so does the compressor speed.

    There is one argument I've heard many times, but its not true. Many people say that superchargers are easier on engine internals because they make less boost at lower RPM's and less power.

    Two things to keep in mind... First is the relationship of horspower and torque at any given RPM, second is the effect of inertial forces on your rods and bearings at any given RPM.

    (TQ * RPM) / 5252 = HP

    conversely

    (HP * 5252) / RPM = TQ

    So lets take an example. A turbo car can make 350 ft-lbs tq at 3000 rpm. A CSC car can make 400 whp at 6000 rpm. At 3000 rpm the turbo car is making 200 hp, at 6000 rpm the csc car is making 350 ft-lbs of tq!

    Even though the torque numbers are identical, the 350 ft-lbs of torque being made at 4000 rpm is far less detrimental than the equivalent torque being made at 6000! The reason is the inertial forces being put on the connecting rods and bearings. At 6k rpm, inertial forces are much greater on the internal parts of the engine than at 4k. How much greater? 225%!!! Inertial forces are exponential; the load increase is proportional to the rpm of the engine squared.

    So it doesn't matter what your lower torque gains are if you run a CSC or turbo and generate 400 whp at 6k rpm. They're both as harsh on the at that point. This is why the Stillen blower is generally regarded as the safest, to the point where you can get a warranty. This is also why raising the rev limited on any FI engine that has been built (even one that makes sub 400 hp) is not a good idea.

    People might say turbos are more efficient and you get more power for your money - and that's all true, but you still gotta make the decision if you actually DO want that power because these engines aren't bombproof in the way factory FI engines are

    Seems like usually the difference is in how well YOU maintain your car cause FI will need it.
    Excellent points and I couldn't agree more! It doesn't matter what way you go. What matters is what fits your needs, driving style and budget. If you don't maintain it the right way, its not going to last!

  8. #8

    Re: supercharger vs turbocharger followup

    good points

    yeah you're right about people spinning out their wheels on a turbo when they shift being a driver related issue. But it does seem to be for as long as I've been reading about people with turbos on the Z that that's what happens. People say they lose traction at 4500 rpms which is peak torque. Now we all know the real issue here is traction. If you run drag radials or seriously wide tires we know that probably won't happen. But people get all turbo crazy and get a turbo on their car then wonder why they break traction with their 255 tires on their bling bling 19 inch rims with a big lip.

    If it's a consolation, I did say that if you took a turbo setup and bought ALL the needed parts, it'd me a monster on the track. But that's a lot of money. A lot more than a $4k turbo kit and an A/F gauge that so many people are in a hurry to put on their car then wonder why they have no traction.

    That's a good point about downshifting on a SC to shoot up to the high rpms.

    However, even at peak tq on a SC car, it won't be anywhere near as high as a turbo. Actually, even up high a turbo car will probably edge out the SC's torque from all the dynos i've looked at. It's that much bigger and if you're flooring it, it could break the tires lose. When you're racing, you're usually flooring it, shifting fast, then flooring it again. With a turbo you have to make sure your car is setup for the traction otherwise you can't floor it - which is lame.

    If any car is running 500hp, it really needs either the widest and stickiest tires it can get, or racing/semi-racing tires because you're getting into race car levels of power



    I absolutely agree that cars with less hp and more traction will always win in most cases. I'm going with a lower hp, lower tq vortech kit instead of a turbo and running 315 yokohama AO48 tires in the rear among other things to help with traction. I want my car to do well at turning so drag radials weren't an option.


    When people say they got a turbo and go on and on how awesome it is then say they have no traction "because it's sooo sweeeet" (or whatever phrase of the week) I roll my eyes because they're not going to ever go fast if they don't have traction. They say they don't get traction until 3rd or 4th gear - well I guess they're the highway king then cause anyone who knows anything doesn't brag about not having traction. They brag about having traction and making fast times

  9. #9

    Re: supercharger vs turbocharger followup

    yeah you're right about people spinning out their wheels on a turbo when they shift being a driver related issue. But it does seem to be for as long as I've been reading about people with turbos on the Z that that's what happens. People say they lose traction at 4500 rpms which is peak torque. Now we all know the real issue here is traction. If you run drag radials or seriously wide tires we know that probably won't happen. But people get all turbo crazy and get a turbo on their car then wonder why they break traction with their 255 tires on their bling bling 19 inch rims with a big lip.

    If it's a consolation, I did say that if you took a turbo setup and bought ALL the needed parts, it'd me a monster on the track. But that's a lot of money. A lot more than a $4k turbo kit and an A/F gauge that so many people are in a hurry to put on their car then wonder why they have no traction.
    Right on. It kills me how many people throw a kit on a stock, or near-stock vehicle. Just setting themselves up for trouble.

  10. #10
    Senior Administrator palmerwmd's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2002
    Location
    Maryland
    Posts
    14,078

    Re: supercharger vs turbocharger followup

    Another Note.

    Even tho my ATI SC works great, I just cant stand the clacketiy noise that everyone says is normal.

    I expcted some whine.
    But the cl;ackeity clack that sounds like the compressors is self-destructing that everyone including ATI has assured me is normal is a constant embarrassment wherever I go.

    People look at you " Dude you know know your car is breaking down?"

  11. #11

    Re: supercharger vs turbocharger followup

    Another Note.

    Even tho my ATI SC works great, I just cant stand the clacketiy noise that everyone says is normal.

    I expcted some whine.
    But the cl;ackeity clack that sounds like the compressors is self-destructing that everyone including ATI has assured me is normal is a constant embarrassment wherever I go.

    People look at you " Dude you know know your car is breaking down?"
    Unfortunately every supercharger is going to make noise. Even Stillen which is supposed to be the quietest still makes a very noticable high pitch whine when its running. The less people know about cars, the more they think something is wrong.

    The noise is a big reason I'm leaning either going turbo or all-engine.

  12. #12
    Senior Administrator palmerwmd's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2002
    Location
    Maryland
    Posts
    14,078

    Re: supercharger vs turbocharger followup

    I dont mind the whine.

    But this noise isnt a whine as so much a crunching clanking noise.

    Guess ATI was right when they said it was normal ( been holding up for 30,000 miles) even so.

    Its makes me feel like I drive a beater.

    I would welcome a nice whine instead.

  13. #13

    Re: supercharger vs turbocharger followup

    "Crunching Walnuts" is how they describe the sound, right?

  14. #14

    Re: supercharger vs turbocharger followup

    that would be an appropriate comparison, yes

  15. #15

    Re: supercharger vs turbocharger followup

    No Noise from NA

  16. #16

    Re: supercharger vs turbocharger followup

    No Noise from NA
    That's not true at all. There's always the incessent whine you get from the NA guys when they get passed by the FI guys.

  17. #17

    Re: supercharger vs turbocharger followup

    No Noise from NA
    That's not true at all. There's always the incessent whine you get from the NA guys when they get passed by the FI guys.
    ROFL!!!

  18. #18

    Re: supercharger vs turbocharger followup

    good one!

  19. #19

    Re: supercharger vs turbocharger followup

    Another Note.

    Even tho my ATI SC works great, I just cant stand the clacketiy noise that everyone says is normal.

    I expcted some whine.
    But the cl;ackeity clack that sounds like the compressors is self-destructing that everyone including ATI has assured me is normal is a constant embarrassment wherever I go.

    People look at you " Dude you know know your car is breaking down?"

    being in the shop now i hear them more and more - i think if you moved over to the turbonetics single you would have a blast with it -

    William

  20. #20

    Hks Supercharger

    This was written in the post about the superchargers for the 350Z.

    "The HKS kit is great and probably higher quality than vortech or ATI and stillen. However its intercooler wouldn't be up for heavy track driving since it's like 1/3 of the normal size. It's not upgradeable at all and HKS does not give you any room for other power mods. You probably could use your own standalone and fuel system though. I've heard the blower unit is more advanced than any of the blowers for the Z - it has more torque but works like the ATI/vortech with building boost. I've heard HKS might not really be supporting the kit or offering it anymore though - maybe it's not true, but someone did say they no longer can find info about it on their site - someone tell me i'm wrong?"

    Some corrections need to be made to this. I have had the HKS Supercharger on my Z since Jan. of 04

    Intercooler-A intercooler the is too BIG or too Small can cause power loss, the intercooler on the HKS kit is good for 400HP. As far staying cool as referenced to in heavy track driving, the HKS supercharger has its own oiling system, you do not tap the oil pan, so heated engine oil is not running thru the supercharger, also it has a oil cooler to cool the supercharger oil, the supercharger itself stays really cool.

    Upgradeable-Yes it is upgradeable, you can get a 9lb pulley, bigger IC, and put any mods on the engine or exhaust, just like you can with any other supercharger kit, and tune it with the F-CON SZ that comes with the kit.

    Support-the HKS Supercharger kit is still sold in Japan, there is some legal things going on between HKS and Rotrex.

    Power- the HKS Supercharger is more turbo like in its power delivery, there was some calculations done (I will have to find them). This is just from memory so dont hold me to this. The HKS Supercharger @328 HP has the same average power in the power band as a Vortech with 380HP. The average power in the power band on the HKS is very good. As we all know average power will out perform peak power.

    I have the HKS Supercharger, with AAM Plenum spacer, 440cc injectors, Nismo Cams, Nismo Exhaust all tuned with the F-Con SZ, AAM reflash, monitored by the HKS navigator. 353 RWHP 328TQ

    This was not to say the HKS is better than any other form of FI, just seems there is alot of misinformation about the HKS floating around, mostly interms of upgradeability of the kit.

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •