Ford Mustang Forums banner

1 - 14 of 14 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
489 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
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???
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
195 Posts
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!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5 Posts
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.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
243 Posts
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.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
707 Posts
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.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
195 Posts
Mike-97-GT said:
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.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
329 Posts
32Vpwr said:


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.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
707 Posts
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.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,280 Posts
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.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
32 Posts
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.
 
1 - 14 of 14 Posts
Top