Author Topic: Turbo or supercharger  (Read 11397 times)

Offline Neo Badness

  • I live here
  • *****
  • Posts: 2,780
  • Feet are for pedals
Re: Turbo or supercharger
« Reply #60 on: 05 January 2011, 13:36 »
if you want ultimate power with NO lag at all, you need to build a nasty littel fuel munching creature called a boost engine.  there are diffrent ways of building them  it can be done with 2 turbochargers but getting the right inpellers is a b!tch. 

basicly you build a jet engine that's sole pourpose in life is to blow as hard as it can into a very large turbocharger.    the jet can be fasioned out of a larger turbocharger,   if the turbo thats blowing boost in the engines direction has some boost fed into the jet that feeding it's exhaust stage this it to prevent the turbo stalling and it how the boost to the engine is regulated.   

the optinal way to do it is to basicly build a turbofan jet engine but the fan in a compressor inpeller desinged for pressure more than flow, this way is much much much mre efficent a lot quiter but still dose get quite hot  it is also much more reliable

the advantage of this system is you can have 40+ psi of boost from idel to the red line if you want with NO lag at all, it's actualy more responsive than a supercharger as the whole system is fully pressuriesd all the way to the throttel butterfly all the time. you tune like you would a supercharger enigne but there is no parastic load on the cranck from the supercharger as it's produceing it's own power   :laugh:



the downsides are.  they are LOUD,  they get very very HOT and f**king hell they guzzel some fuel a bit quick

Sounds like you'd ideally want two, front and rear then you can sit on the fuel tank in the middle...

You don't own a Mk2, you support it.

Offline danny_p

  • Forum addict
  • *
  • Posts: 4,646
Re: Turbo or supercharger
« Reply #61 on: 05 January 2011, 16:21 »
they are actualy quite small espectaly the turbofan type.
smallest self contained unit i've see was 320 mm long ( from air intake to exhaust )  and  175 mm diamiter.
only connections were +12v (start power )  0v (ground)   + 12v (start signal)  + 0-12v  ( throttel )  fuel feed and return , oil feed and return.



you only want 1  you chould use 1 of them to feed two engines tho chould have one of them frount and one rear
all the VW's have gone bar 1.

Offline Sam

  • I live here
  • *****
  • Posts: 3,189
  • Sam I am
Re: Turbo or supercharger
« Reply #62 on: 05 January 2011, 18:26 »
*what danny p said*

I just did a little sex wee


The entire world is a Money Pit, you just have to pick yours.

Offline dan_apps

  • I live here
  • *****
  • Posts: 2,677
  • too low for british roads!
Re: Turbo or supercharger
« Reply #63 on: 05 January 2011, 18:39 »
not much been mentioned on the servicing of a supercharger, every 15k init? i likez my turbos. supercharger whine yes is great but from a practical sense as in an everyday driver id go turbo myself.

Offline Peej1981

  • I live here
  • *****
  • Posts: 705
  • Its Whats Under The Hood That Counts........
Re: Turbo or supercharger
« Reply #64 on: 05 January 2011, 18:51 »
I thought it was 20-25k for standard chargers? Modded ones go down to 15k??? but i maybe wrong?


Id Rather Push A VW Then Drive A Ford. 

www.bombercountydubs.co.uk

Offline Chris-White

  • I live here
  • *****
  • Posts: 1,840
  • Manufactured in Germany. Ruined in Britain.
Re: Turbo or supercharger
« Reply #65 on: 05 January 2011, 20:11 »
I thought it was 20-25k for standard chargers? Modded ones go down to 15k??? but i maybe wrong?

only G60's.
Lysholms and eatons are pretty much maintenance (and oil) free. They dont however offer the cool power delivery of the G60, or the noise.
S4 Avant. Eibach springs. 18" Avus. RS4 Intercoolers. Viper Tuned. Goes Fast.

Offline Dolly

  • I live here
  • *****
  • Posts: 721
Re: Turbo or supercharger
« Reply #66 on: 05 January 2011, 20:19 »
Anything with SUPER in the title has to be good.

had a G60 loved the power delivery, turbos are over rated  :laugh:

Offline Peej1981

  • I live here
  • *****
  • Posts: 705
  • Its Whats Under The Hood That Counts........
Re: Turbo or supercharger
« Reply #67 on: 05 January 2011, 21:40 »
I thought it was 20-25k for standard chargers? Modded ones go down to 15k??? but i maybe wrong?

only G60's.
Lysholms and eatons are pretty much maintenance (and oil) free. They dont however offer the cool power delivery of the G60, or the noise.

Tell me about it my golf sounds like an monster :grin:, yet got standard gti back box, sounds even better now i have a front mounted intercooler.


Id Rather Push A VW Then Drive A Ford. 

www.bombercountydubs.co.uk

Offline Dolly

  • I live here
  • *****
  • Posts: 721
Re: Turbo or supercharger
« Reply #68 on: 05 January 2011, 21:47 »
You need the "chilli pack" from G-Werks if they still do it.

Well or a BBM http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bAOOv606Zvo
« Last Edit: 05 January 2011, 21:58 by Dolly »

Offline danny_p

  • Forum addict
  • *
  • Posts: 4,646
Re: Turbo or supercharger
« Reply #69 on: 06 January 2011, 00:01 »
eatons are low matance as well,   they like the odd oil change but if used out of spec ( rpm and boost wacked up ) they do chew the shock absorber coupeling out that transmits drive from the nose shaft to the primary rotor.  uprated poly ones are avalible tho
all the VW's have gone bar 1.