What’s better ?

Discussion in 'Turbocharged, Supercharged or Nitrous !' started by BagPuss, Oct 24, 2003.

?

What’s better, Turbocharged, Supercharged or Nitrous !

  1. Turbocharged

    56.8%
  2. Supercharged

    22.7%
  3. Nitrous

    9.1%
  4. All of the above !

    11.4%
  1. Zaphod

    Zaphod Forum Member

    Joined:
    Apr 6, 2006
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Wantage
    In the perfomace stakes, there is no replacement for displacement. Large V8 or V12 wins every time on sound, power and reliablity. The yanks were getting 400+bhp in the late sixties along with the ability to cover 400K miles + without rebuilds. the down side is that was from engines of over 7litres and MPG was looking at 15 mpg if you were lucky. But the fuel usage is not that diffrent comapred to teh 400 BHP+ turbo jap cars of toady, but even they can't get the same reliabilty. and if you can get a 215 buick engine transversly into a Mini then I would supect you can get a 298 into a Mk2
     
  2. Deako Paid Member Paid Member

    Joined:
    Oct 22, 2003
    Likes Received:
    133
    Location:
    ReddiWraps
    We also like cars to corner though. :)
     
  3. veedubnutz Forum Junkie

    Joined:
    Oct 22, 2003
    Likes Received:
    6
    Location:
    Worcester UK
    :lol: Well pointed out!
     
  4. stroybolt In Delete Queue

    Joined:
    Nov 6, 2006
    Likes Received:
    0
    Well from what I heard, Nitrous is, and will always be, most bang for your buck. It costs less and with the right system, and could produce over 200 bhp instantly. But it will also tear up your engine unless done CORRECTLY. None of this Fast & Furious BS.
    Turbo is highly reliable because of the turbo lag and it doesn't kick in until a certain RPM level. So it won't tear up your engine as much. It is also very popular because of the sound of the BOV. (PSSSSHHHH)
    Superchargers are power all around. It will not produce as much power for what you pay, but is definitely most fun to drive. C'mon, power all the way around from when you hit the gas to letting off.
    I currently have a VF Engineering charger in my '95 GTI VR6 which I replaced from a Kinetics turbo kit. I don't feel as much power, but it's way more fun to drive and is a lot smoother.
     
  5. casper1496 New Member

    Joined:
    Nov 6, 2006
    Likes Received:
    0
    blah blah blah, supercharger..... power from as soon as you put your foot down.... plus ive just paid to have one fitted so im biased towards it. everyone loves a turbo coz of the notiorious vooooooooooooom tissssssssshhhhhhhh

    you know its true
     
  6. sdj_mk3 Forum Member

    Joined:
    Oct 11, 2005
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Oxfordshire
    Nitrous, nitrous nitrous. The ONLY disadvantage is bottle re-fills and mine costs about 20 a month and I use it a reasonable amount out on the roads, bearing in mind the rest of the time my car isn't using any more fuel than a standard GTi. Mainly to educate French car driving chav's. I am building a superchaged motor at the moment though so feel free to call me a hypocrite!!
     
  7. Tspec

    Tspec Forum Member

    Joined:
    Oct 12, 2006
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Scotland
    Got to be Turbocharger.
    ive had my mk4 tuned but there is no way that the original 150bhp was slow. its very quiet, but u cant say slow.
    im not that interested in the noise, prefer the subtle approach. yes, my DV makes a nice noise but im far more interested in performance. wouldnt say no to all three though.
     
    Last edited: Nov 7, 2006

Share This Page

  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
    Dismiss Notice