Turbo V Supercharger (g6o) Conversion

Turbo V Supercharger (g6o) Conversion on mk 1 gti 1983 Clipper

pros and cons of each

Whats better?

Discuss…..

?

  what do you want to know?

basics:

charger…..boost through the rev range sound= (strongly suggest changing to an eaton )

turbo…. more boost than a charger, potntially(sp) more power for your money, and a lot more reliable, but a fair amout of work to convert a charged engine to turbo

Turbo pros/cons.
Easier to make power at higher revs, can be laggy at low rpms.
Uses energy that would usually be wasted ( exhaust heat and pressure).
Heating of intake charge and surrounding environment.
Complex installation.
Needs turbo manifold and supports.
Oil feed and return pipe needed.
Coolant lines desirable but not mandatory.
Requires chargecooling ( and its pipework)for best results.
Longer air travel paths induce boost lag due to larger system volumes.

Supercharger.

Instant boost available at idle.
Uses energy to make more power so parasitic losses are higher.
Can be a simpler install.
May run out of boost before desired redline.
No requirements for special exhaust manifolds so simpler plumbing.
Benefits from chargecooling as with turbo.
Satisfying whine?
Lower overall boost pressures available.

In the end it all comes down to personal choice.