# pro's and con's... turbo charging vs supercharging **URL:** \ **Category:** NYSpeed Automotive\ **Created:** [August 29, 2007, 8:25am UTC](https://forums.speedlife.net/t/pros-and-cons-turbo-charging-vs-supercharging/34561 "2007-08-29T08:25:36Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![Dr.Stevil](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/da6949/32.png) [@Dr.Stevil](https://forums.speedlife.net/u/Dr.Stevil)\ **Post date:** [August 29, 2007, 8:25am UTC](https://forums.speedlife.net/t/pros-and-cons-turbo-charging-vs-supercharging/34561/1 "2007-08-29T08:25:36Z")
well… over the winter I’m gonna bite the bullet and go forced induction on the GTO. With the exception of a new clutch that’ll hold the power better and upgrades to the fuel/ignition system (and a cam to help the setup), the motor is going to be left stock for now. My current options are an STS turbo kit or a centrifigul supercharger (procharger). Now it seems like the SC would be a more straight forward, bolt it on and go type of setup where the turbo setup would be a bit more complex and probably wind up costing me a bunch more $$$ in the long run, but I assume it would be easier to up the power in the event of building a forged motor. for those that have been down this road, which would be better in my case? I’m not looking for a race car… I just want a fun to drive streetable car that will drive like stock… with the exception of some added horses. I would like the option to go bigger in the future, but it probably wont be for a while after that unless I blow the motor up I’d like to shoot for 450-500 to the wheels. This is going to be my first real experience with forced induction (that didn’t come with a power adder from the factory) and would hate to spend a ton of cash, only to regret not going the other route. ---
**Author:** ![Toda\_Party](https://yyz2.discourse-cdn.com/flex034/user_avatar/forums.speedlife.net/toda_party/32/7354_2.png) [@Toda\_Party](https://forums.speedlife.net/u/Toda_Party)\ **Post date:** [August 29, 2007, 8:26am UTC](https://forums.speedlife.net/t/pros-and-cons-turbo-charging-vs-supercharging/34561/2 "2007-08-29T08:26:43Z")
STS is garbage. why not just throw on a wet kit and call it a day? turbo is not worth it on ur cars unless u do it right (in-bay setup, lots of modification to the bay, etc)… either throw on a charger, or just juice it…forget rear mount turbo kits ---
**Author:** ![LZ1](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/7ab992/32.png) [@LZ1](https://forums.speedlife.net/u/LZ1)\ **Post date:** [August 29, 2007, 8:30am UTC](https://forums.speedlife.net/t/pros-and-cons-turbo-charging-vs-supercharging/34561/3 "2007-08-29T08:30:40Z")
Just spray a 150 shot ---
**Author:** ![Dr.Stevil](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/da6949/32.png) [@Dr.Stevil](https://forums.speedlife.net/u/Dr.Stevil)\ **Post date:** [August 29, 2007, 8:31am UTC](https://forums.speedlife.net/t/pros-and-cons-turbo-charging-vs-supercharging/34561/4 "2007-08-29T08:31:13Z")
I don’t want n20 as it’s not always going to be there. I want access to the power by just hitting the throttle (I know I can get a remote opener and shit, but it just seems like a hastle… plus constantly refilling the bottle would get old) I’ve read that alot of people are happy with their STS kits (and make some good power)… although I have no personal experience with them either. There is a TT kit avalible for the goats, but it requires cutting the fender walls and shit which I didn’t really want to do (and it costs a pretty penny too) ---
**Author:** ![neonglh](https://yyz2.discourse-cdn.com/flex034/user_avatar/forums.speedlife.net/neonglh/32/4951_2.png) [@neonglh](https://forums.speedlife.net/u/neonglh)\ **Post date:** [August 29, 2007, 8:32am UTC](https://forums.speedlife.net/t/pros-and-cons-turbo-charging-vs-supercharging/34561/5 "2007-08-29T08:32:54Z")
Talk to Adam about STS kits. He traps 130’s with his GTO, with his STS. Its fairly reliable too, to my knowledge. Makes over 600 whp. I still don’t like the rear mounts too much, so much to go wrong, and so much to troubleshoot. Nitrous would be the cheapest and easiest solution 🙂 ---
**Author:** ![BuickGN](https://yyz2.discourse-cdn.com/flex034/user_avatar/forums.speedlife.net/buickgn/32/7200_2.png) [@BuickGN](https://forums.speedlife.net/u/BuickGN)\ **Post date:** [August 29, 2007, 8:33am UTC](https://forums.speedlife.net/t/pros-and-cons-turbo-charging-vs-supercharging/34561/6 "2007-08-29T08:33:29Z")
ask bill about his STS kit ---
**Author:** ![LZ1](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/7ab992/32.png) [@LZ1](https://forums.speedlife.net/u/LZ1)\ **Post date:** [August 29, 2007, 8:35am UTC](https://forums.speedlife.net/t/pros-and-cons-turbo-charging-vs-supercharging/34561/7 "2007-08-29T08:35:25Z")
:lol: Go boosted…start down that path of dumping 20k into your car to make it reliable and fast… Then when thats said and done…realize you just wasted all that money and sell said car to buy something more fun to drive on the street. Are you still paying on this car? Do you have a DD all year round? ---
**Author:** ![95Z28](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/9/85e7bf/32.png) [@95Z28](https://forums.speedlife.net/u/95Z28)\ **Post date:** [August 29, 2007, 8:58am UTC](https://forums.speedlife.net/t/pros-and-cons-turbo-charging-vs-supercharging/34561/8 "2007-08-29T08:58:53Z")
[quote=“neonglh,post:5,topic:34561"”] Talk to Adam about STS kits. He traps 130’s with his GTO, with his STS. Its fairly reliable too, to my knowledge. Makes over 600 whp. I still don’t like the rear mounts too much, so much to go wrong, and so much to troubleshoot. Nitrous would be the cheapest and easiest solution 🙂 [/quote] So he traps 130+, but what does he ET? STS kits have made a name for themselves not being able to perform at the track. If you really want to stay away from n2o, and your choice is between STS and ATI, it’s a no brainer, the Procharger is the better performer. ---
**Author:** ![Jon](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/3bc359/32.png) [@Jon](https://forums.speedlife.net/u/Jon)\ **Post date:** [August 29, 2007, 8:59am UTC](https://forums.speedlife.net/t/pros-and-cons-turbo-charging-vs-supercharging/34561/9 "2007-08-29T08:59:02Z")
/thread ---
**Author:** ![Toda\_Party](https://yyz2.discourse-cdn.com/flex034/user_avatar/forums.speedlife.net/toda_party/32/7354_2.png) [@Toda\_Party](https://forums.speedlife.net/u/Toda_Party)\ **Post date:** [August 29, 2007, 9:04am UTC](https://forums.speedlife.net/t/pros-and-cons-turbo-charging-vs-supercharging/34561/10 "2007-08-29T09:04:42Z")
[quote=“Dr.Stevil,post:4,topic:34561"”] I don’t want n20 as it’s not always going to be there. I want access to the power by just hitting the throttle (I know I can get a remote opener and shit, but it just seems like a hastle… plus constantly refilling the bottle would get old) I’ve read that alot of people are happy with their STS kits (and make some good power)… although I have no personal experience with them either. There is a TT kit avalible for the goats, but it requires cutting the fender walls and shit which I didn’t really want to do (and it costs a pretty penny too) [/quote] I hear you, and agree, but its not worth it to go turbo on V-8’s unless ur willing to drop a pretty penny… spray or procharge. or shit, do both! ---
**Author:** ![Toda\_Party](https://yyz2.discourse-cdn.com/flex034/user_avatar/forums.speedlife.net/toda_party/32/7354_2.png) [@Toda\_Party](https://forums.speedlife.net/u/Toda_Party)\ **Post date:** [August 29, 2007, 9:05am UTC](https://forums.speedlife.net/t/pros-and-cons-turbo-charging-vs-supercharging/34561/11 "2007-08-29T09:05:51Z")
[quote=“95Z28,post:8,topic:34561"”] So he traps 130+, but what does he ET? STS kits have made a name for themselves not being able to perform at the track. If you really want to stay away from n2o, and your choice is between STS and ATI, it’s a no brainer, the Procharger is the better performer. [/quote] 130 trap is still a 130 trap, i never understood how ppl can demean that by bringing up the ET argument, which is basically about traction and driver skill at that point…its not the car’s fault if it runs a slower ET ya know? ---
**Author:** ![sureshot007](https://yyz2.discourse-cdn.com/flex034/user_avatar/forums.speedlife.net/sureshot007/32/7345_2.png) [@sureshot007](https://forums.speedlife.net/u/sureshot007)\ **Post date:** [August 29, 2007, 9:06am UTC](https://forums.speedlife.net/t/pros-and-cons-turbo-charging-vs-supercharging/34561/12 "2007-08-29T09:06:30Z")
Supercharger. Always. ---
**Author:** ![95Z28](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/9/85e7bf/32.png) [@95Z28](https://forums.speedlife.net/u/95Z28)\ **Post date:** [August 29, 2007, 9:07am UTC](https://forums.speedlife.net/t/pros-and-cons-turbo-charging-vs-supercharging/34561/13 "2007-08-29T09:07:25Z")
[quote=“Jon,post:9,topic:34561"”] [![]( " - YouTube") ](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sGveOp7aC1Q) /thread [/quote] Thats not one of the choices. And I brought up the trap thing because it seems that most of the STS cars can throw down a nice trap speed but aren’t able to ET worth a shit. ---
**Author:** ![CrazyLT1](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/bc79bd/32.png) [@CrazyLT1](https://forums.speedlife.net/u/CrazyLT1)\ **Post date:** [August 29, 2007, 9:09am UTC](https://forums.speedlife.net/t/pros-and-cons-turbo-charging-vs-supercharging/34561/14 "2007-08-29T09:09:22Z")
Nitrous is definitely your best bang for your $$ - especially on a high compression motor like yours. But if you must have forced induction, then I would take a supercharger over a turbo. A turbo will involve much more work and potential problems that won’t be necessary to achieve the modest power levels you are aiming for… Procharger and Vortech are both very good brands ---
**Author:** ![traumadog](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/8baadc/32.png) [@traumadog](https://forums.speedlife.net/u/traumadog)\ **Post date:** [August 29, 2007, 9:09am UTC](https://forums.speedlife.net/t/pros-and-cons-turbo-charging-vs-supercharging/34561/15 "2007-08-29T09:09:22Z")
Just curious - if it’s a DD-type car, then why not a Maggie? Not that I’m advocating for it, but it’ll have more grunt down low vs. the Procharger’s higher top-end boost. ---
**Author:** ![HYBOOST](https://yyz2.discourse-cdn.com/flex034/user_avatar/forums.speedlife.net/hyboost/32/5088_2.png) [@HYBOOST](https://forums.speedlife.net/u/HYBOOST)\ **Post date:** [August 29, 2007, 9:13am UTC](https://forums.speedlife.net/t/pros-and-cons-turbo-charging-vs-supercharging/34561/16 "2007-08-29T09:13:06Z")
I have a turbo car, from the factory, and I hate the turbo lag. It’s not much, but when you are next to a fast car and 3 beeps later, your toast unless you “brake torque” the shit out of it. The pros, no power loss with a turbo in compaired to a Belt driven super charger. If I were building one like you are, go with a SC! ---
**Author:** ![JayS](https://yyz2.discourse-cdn.com/flex034/user_avatar/forums.speedlife.net/jays/32/15375_2.png) [@JayS](https://forums.speedlife.net/u/JayS)\ **Post date:** [August 29, 2007, 9:13am UTC](https://forums.speedlife.net/t/pros-and-cons-turbo-charging-vs-supercharging/34561/17 "2007-08-29T09:13:06Z")
Watching this thread with unfortunate curiosity… 🙂 ---
**Author:** ![neonglh](https://yyz2.discourse-cdn.com/flex034/user_avatar/forums.speedlife.net/neonglh/32/4951_2.png) [@neonglh](https://forums.speedlife.net/u/neonglh)\ **Post date:** [August 29, 2007, 9:15am UTC](https://forums.speedlife.net/t/pros-and-cons-turbo-charging-vs-supercharging/34561/18 "2007-08-29T09:15:23Z")
[quote=“95Z28,post:8,topic:34561"”] So he traps 130+, but what does he ET? STS kits have made a name for themselves not being able to perform at the track. If you really want to stay away from n2o, and your choice is between STS and ATI, it’s a no brainer, the Procharger is the better performer. [/quote] Mid 11’s. GTO’s are not known for being fast at the track. I don’t know whether to blame that one on the car, or the turbo kit… Toda, I’m with you. The ET isnt so much a factor of how you’re making the power, but more the driver, car, the tires, the suspension, etc… Getting to 130+ is the power adders job, not getting the power to the ground. –mark ---
**Author:** ![mgmid7070](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/cc9497/32.png) [@mgmid7070](https://forums.speedlife.net/u/mgmid7070)\ **Post date:** [August 29, 2007, 9:23am UTC](https://forums.speedlife.net/t/pros-and-cons-turbo-charging-vs-supercharging/34561/19 "2007-08-29T09:23:12Z")
is the procharger system intercooled? ---
**Author:** ![95Z28](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/9/85e7bf/32.png) [@95Z28](https://forums.speedlife.net/u/95Z28)\ **Post date:** [August 29, 2007, 9:27am UTC](https://forums.speedlife.net/t/pros-and-cons-turbo-charging-vs-supercharging/34561/20 "2007-08-29T09:27:45Z")
[quote=“neonglh,post:18,topic:34561"”] Mid 11’s. GTO’s are not known for being fast at the track. I don’t know whether to blame that one on the car, or the turbo kit… Toda, I’m with you. The ET isnt so much a factor of how you’re making the power, but more the driver, car, the tires, the suspension, etc… Getting to 130+ is the power adders job, not getting the power to the ground. –mark [/quote] With 600rwhp I’d expect a little better, but you make a good point when you say GTO’s aren’t really tailored for the track, for several reasons. [Next page](https://forums.speedlife.net/t/pros-and-cons-turbo-charging-vs-supercharging/34561.md?page=2)