Which is better for over years? TC or SC? - Ford Mustang Forums : Corral.net Mustang Forum
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
post #1 of 14 Old 04-30-2002, 04:19 PM Thread Starter
 
Trader Feedback: (0)
Join Date: Jan 2002
Posts: 489
Which is better for over years? TC or SC?

Which one is going to last the longest? I don't wanna spend money on something I am going to be fixing all the time. I think TDC only gives a one year war as does most SC companies. I know the benifits of both (for the most part) and would rather go for the turbo if it lasts longer. I am not to worried about awsome speed but to smoke the trans am next to me would be nice. I want something that will move and last a while? So which is it???

Yoop33 is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #2 of 14 Old 04-30-2002, 06:37 PM
Banned
 
Trader Feedback: (0)
Join Date: Apr 2002
Posts: 356
I would look into the Procharger P1SC supercharger. I think that may have a 3 yr. warranty. I have heard they make great power

post #3 of 14 Old 04-30-2002, 06:52 PM
 
Trader Feedback: (0)
Join Date: Feb 2000
Posts: 195
Well, not to start a flame, but how many supercharged 18wheelers do you see in the trucking industry? Lemans winners? J/K guys!! Either will last the life time of your car, as long as you meticulously maintain them. You get out what you put in. Good luck with your choice!
32Vpwr is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #4 of 14 Old 04-30-2002, 07:05 PM
 
Trader Feedback: (0)
Join Date: Jul 2000
Posts: 5
It's not a wise idea to put a turbo on a car that wasn't designed from the factory with a turbo on it. Sooner or later, you'll be ripping apart the motor and completely rebuilding it. Plus, turbos are a huge pain in the ass when it comes to maintenance. My first car was an '87 Supra Turbo, and maintenance was a *****!

If you want to go with forced induction, I'd definitely go with a supercharger. For no other reason than Mustangs have been getting blown for ever, and there's much better reliability with a blower (application pending, of course) than with a turbo.

Just my two cents. Good luck with whatever you choose to do.
Mike-97-GT is offline  
post #5 of 14 Old 04-30-2002, 07:40 PM
Registered User
 
Trader Feedback: (0)
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Long Island, NY
Posts: 243
It is not really fair to talk about a 15 year old Supra turbo and compare it to today's technology. Turbos are extremely reliable. I'm not going to say which is more reliable, but I will say with proper maintenance, both can be quite reliable. I have had my turbo since August and have had zero problems with the turbo system.

Turbocharged 99 GT - SOLD 2003
2004 Black Ford Expedition EB - Sold 2008
Mobile Auto Repair Business Owner
Turbo99GT is offline  
post #6 of 14 Old 04-30-2002, 07:43 PM
Registered User
 
tirefryr's Avatar
 
Trader Feedback: (1)
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: South Bend, IN
Posts: 705
Mike97.....
What maintenace are you talking about with the turbo???? I've had several turbo t-birds and cougars. Never had a problem with the turbo. In fact, my last t-bird was an '87 turbo coupe with 150,000 plus miles on it with the original turbo and the thing still put out boost. Never had to do a thing to it motor wise. I love blowers and turbos, but the turbos seem to be puttin out more power. Look at TDC's new GT. Tens on only 5 pounds of boost! Now what SC is gonna give you that perfromance with only 5 pounds? And most people will complain that turbos cost more. Well, they do, but you usually get everything for install. from the turbos to the fuel system. Both have benefits and drawbacks. Do some research and get exactly what YOU want. Good luck.

'11 GT
'87 Turbo Coupe
'94 F-150
tirefryr is offline  
post #7 of 14 Old 04-30-2002, 07:47 PM
 
Trader Feedback: (0)
Join Date: Apr 2001
Posts: 224
My mustang was built for a turbo from the factory simply because it made 215 hp and had 9:1 compression both are durable pick the one you like.
jade is offline  
post #8 of 14 Old 04-30-2002, 07:49 PM
 
Trader Feedback: (0)
Join Date: Apr 2001
Posts: 224
tdc in the 10's on 5 psi is a news flash to me.......car runs good but 5 psi?
jade is offline  
post #9 of 14 Old 04-30-2002, 08:58 PM
 
Trader Feedback: (0)
Join Date: Feb 2000
Posts: 195
Quote:
Originally posted by Mike-97-GT
It's not a wise idea to put a turbo on a car that wasn't designed from the factory with a turbo on it.
A mustang was designed from the factory just as much for a turbocharger as it is a supercharger - it isn't for either. However, 9:1 static compression is a good compromise for street and boost. Had the motor been built 8:1 with billet rods, steel crank and a 4 bolt block, well, we'd all be singin'. Anyway, point being, both a blower and turbo do the same thing - lets just leave it at that.
32Vpwr is offline  
post #10 of 14 Old 04-30-2002, 09:15 PM
 
Trader Feedback: (0)
Join Date: Dec 2001
Posts: 329
Quote:
Originally posted by 32Vpwr


A mustang was designed from the factory just as much for a turbocharger as it is a supercharger - it isn't for either. However, 9:1 static compression is a good compromise for street and boost. Had the motor been built 8:1 with billet rods, steel crank and a 4 bolt block, well, we'd all be singin'. Anyway, point being, both a blower and turbo do the same thing - lets just leave it at that.
Why don't we leave it at they both make boost.

81blown4.6 is offline  
post #11 of 14 Old 04-30-2002, 10:43 PM
Registered User
 
tirefryr's Avatar
 
Trader Feedback: (1)
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: South Bend, IN
Posts: 705
My bad.... You're right Jade. I read wrong. In the APR. 2002 issue of 5.0 they have an article on Scott Sussman's single turbo '01 GT. It states the car put 444HP and 509 ft.lbs. on just 5.5 pounds of boost. It ran a 12.04 at117 at the Fun Ford race in Gainesville on Mickey Thompson sprtsmans. He expects 11s with slicks. So I was wrong, but that's still better than what even a 6 pound blower on a cobra can do! I am amazed. Also JADE, do you own Jade's? I'm looking at getting a turbo kit for my cobra after summer. And I need some help with what to get. Thanks.

'11 GT
'87 Turbo Coupe
'94 F-150
tirefryr is offline  
post #12 of 14 Old 05-01-2002, 12:45 AM
 
Trader Feedback: (0)
Join Date: Apr 2001
Posts: 224
shoot me an e-mail
jade is offline  
post #13 of 14 Old 05-01-2002, 06:08 AM
Registered User
 
SnakeBit's Avatar
 
Trader Feedback: (0)
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: Griffin, GA USA
Posts: 1,280
In terms of reliability of the unit, it seems to me that a S/C can hold up longer. Consider engine shutdown. You turn off the key and 2 things happen, your engine stops running, and your oil stops flowing.

For a S/C, when you shut off your engine, the S/C also stops. However, a Turbo is spinning due to exhaust flow, so even though your engine and oil stop, the turbo will continue to spin for a while. But without fresh oil flowing, the bearings can cook.

Some people with Turbos, let the engine idle for a minute or two while the turbo slows down. The fastest way to ruin a turbo is to rev the engine (causing the turbo to spin up), then shut off the engine. This will cause the residual oil on the turbo bearings to "coke".

To increase the reliability, some people use a sump which is higher than the turbo, which will drip oil for several minutes after shutdown. Another approach I have seen is an electric pump with a time delay, which will run for x minutes after shutdown to pump oil over the bearings.

So unless you have one of these 2 post shutdown oiler arrangements, common sense tells me that a S/C should be more reliabable (everything else being equal), IMO.

Fred
03 Cobra Coupe DSG

“You don’t need the bullet when you got the ballot.” ~George Clinton
SnakeBit is offline  
post #14 of 14 Old 05-01-2002, 06:18 AM
 
Trader Feedback: (0)
Join Date: Nov 2001
Posts: 32
as long as you get a turbo timer to have the engine idle for a few minutes after shut down you shouldnt have any problems with coking.

If turbos were unreliable you wouldn't see car manufactures like Toyota, VW, and Subaru use them in factory cars. I think the actual turbo will be just as reliable as a supercharger. In either case you are more likely to have the engine fail than the power adder.
shabazkilla is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Reply

Bookmarks

Quick Reply
Message:
Options

Register Now



In order to be able to post messages on the Ford Mustang Forums : Corral.net Mustang Forum forums, you must first register.
Please enter your desired user name, your email address and other required details in the form below.

User Name:
Password
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.

Password:


Confirm Password:
Email Address
Please enter a valid email address for yourself.

Email Address:
OR

Log-in










Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Linear Mode



Posting Rules  
You may post new threads
You may post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On

 
For the best viewing experience please update your browser to Google Chrome