# Turbo vs. Procharger, Lt1 **URL:** \ **Category:** NYSpeed Automotive\ **Created:** [November 10, 2006, 11:53pm UTC](https://forums.speedlife.net/t/turbo-vs-procharger-lt1/20029 "2006-11-10T23:53:26Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 1\ **Showing post:** 55
**Author:** ![turbo\_ls1\_ss](https://yyz2.discourse-cdn.com/flex034/user_avatar/forums.speedlife.net/turbo_ls1_ss/32/7303_2.png) [@turbo\_ls1\_ss](https://forums.speedlife.net/u/turbo_ls1_ss)\ **Post date:** [November 12, 2006, 10:26pm UTC](https://forums.speedlife.net/t/turbo-vs-procharger-lt1/20029/55 "2006-11-12T22:26:37Z")
> [@The\_Russian](#): > > I know chuck runs 18 psi as his high boost, granted is procharged but that puts him at 690rwhp. I have scratched the idea of doing headers twice. maybe you misread, but i meant heads. The engine will be properly built. by a shop or someone who knows their stuff. VE??? something with valves. I assume good air flow. > > The motor will be fully built and the turbo kit will be the last thing to be essentially bolted on. lol…idk where ur getting these figures about chuck. hes not even close to 18psi, and never has been. and he hasnt been dyno’d since last year on last years setup VE = volumetric efficiency. basically, how efficient the engine is, meaning, how well its ability to pump air. thats all an engine is, an air pump. you raise VE with cubes, and good flowing heads and a properly speced cam, intake, so on and so forth --- _[View the full topic](https://forums.speedlife.net/t/turbo-vs-procharger-lt1/20029)._