What’s better ?

I really liked the sudden big boost adrenalin rush from the K04 turbo on my Leon Cupra R225 but traction was a problem if you tried to get the car to accelerate quickly out of corners on anything other than bone dry. The Supercharger on my G60 is running standard at the moment so the boost is smooth and instant unlike the LCR. My mates G60 has been fettled with, produces around 235 and scared the 5hit out of me when he finally let me loose in it.

Have to say that my plan for the future would be the 225 K04 engine with Revo remap stuffed under the bonnet of my Syncro but dont really want to change my car from original. +-+-+-+-+-+-+- [:^(]

 

snap as i now catagorically know my jetta is faster than Shaun Hatton's MK2 tx that holds 5th place on their table and his times where posted in the dry

 

LLoyd. Just got to say your Jetta looks sweet as ....

 

Can relate to this, but the prob with high power 1.8T VAG cars is that there is no LSD fitted as standard. On my 20VT the viscous coupling helps no end out of corners when accelerating.

 

Nitrous for me. Best value BHP/Lb ft for your still. You can switch it off when you are not using it.


Turbo's and superchargers all suffer when thrapped around a track and you get heat soak.





It really all depends on what the application is. If road use I'd choose supercharger or turbo any day, but if for occasional quarter miling, Nitrous EVERY SINGLE TIME. Track work, a decent n/a engine wins as it does not suffer heat soak and the like and is genuinely more reliable than any forced induction method. Nitrous has a bad stigma attached to it which is a shame as it is awesome on quarter mile days!

 

turbocharged and supercharged, i've had both.

Both standard and modified and i've learnt one thing;

Get the car set up to make sure you are getting the best out of it. What is the point of paying out for bolt on go faster goodies if the car is not set up to make the most out of them?

So many people fit cams, air filters, exhausts and don't bother. I'm sure most of us have done this, me included

 

turbo hands down, once you play with a big turbo that's been carefully chosen for you specific setup you'll kick yourself in the head for even thinking about anything else.


Nitrous can be added to the mix too, but it's not better than a turbo


Paul

 

N/A for staying power and running on the redline all day long w/o fear of divine retribution.


Supercharged for all-day/all-rev power and the most "elegant" solution for power.


Turbo for real power, and... VOOOOOOOOOtssssss... VOOOtssssss


Nitrous for the smile and the Dr. Jeckyl/Mr. Hyde effect


In the order of Turbo, N/A, Supercharger, Nitrous for me.

 

supercharger all day, i own a g60 golf which i was going to sell for a nice new(ish) mk4 turbo, but after the test drive i just couldnt justify it, nice and smooth........and thats about it!!


whereas my stsndard g60 just goes like stink!!a huge rush of power when you need it with no lag! the power of a standard mk 2 1.8 16v feels so much better then a standard mk 4 turbo.


the turbo engines are now popular due to the magazines pushing them, but for a real enthusiast driver its supercharging!

 

Nuff said i think

 

As i own both a turbocharged and supercharged car i must admit i prefer the supercharger as it seems to have an almost instant power delivery(and then there's the noise),but it's all down to personal preference.

 

Still long hair. Samson had long hair.

 

how long was his hair























was it this long

 

supercharged as i have a tuned one. grin factor everytime.


never been in a highly tuned N/A car though. think that would be second place, as i love the sound when they rev really high on twin 45s

 

Have any of you guys ever been in a 600whp 4cyl 16v vw?


Let met tell you something, he wasnt running a supercharger

 

i would say charger as have G60 but can joltwhen flooring it around 3000 revs in 3 or 4 gear.


friend has 20vt and power is really smooth all the way to top endeven at 225bhp,


progreesive nos is smooth but burst is quite the opposite.


but then vr6 has bags of to power and low done grunt


i think the final answer is all of them in the owners hands.

 

supercharger, smoother than turbo, fwd takes up to 250bhp on mk3's without too much damage, turbo makes it worse as the drivetrain takes a pumelling when it kicks in, where as the charger is progressive. For longevity i'd stick with supercharging.

my vr6 has no low down grunt, it needs a schrick (ok im overstating it, it does have a bit of l.d.g)
Edited by: Hiren

 

deffo not nitrous

i got a wizards kit but my valver was off the rd, so stuck it on a friends 1.9 pug.
20 miles later the bottle was empty, and all for the sakes of a 25 shot.
bottle was weighed dry and wet, it was deffinatly full.

so i took it off and sold it as its the most expensive way of getting 25bhp ive ever come accross if you actually use it instead of just looking at it.

fair enough its 100bhp for a few hundred pounds so if you only boot it once a month its fine. otherwise its terrible fuel ecconomy... really really terrible!!

 

C'mon people! Turbos are a form of supercharging! So all that have voted for Supercharging have, in a way, voted for turboing too!

 

G60 for me, from 1500 rpm to redline in 5th gear even with stock 78mm pulley (10 psi) it pulls like a train. . Never though 5th could be so interesting