Supercharger vs. Turbocharger - Page 3 - Chevy Cobalt Forum / Cobalt Reviews / Cobalt SS / Cobalt Parts
Engine Mods Talk about Chevy Cobalt Engine Modifications here.

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
post #21 of 198 (permalink) Old 10-04-2008, 12:57 AM
Newcomer
 
ksmutek's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 17
So I have heard a lot of hype about the new cobalt SS turbo and how it is putting out more power then the s/c. Are they both capable of putting out a max psi of around 20 to 25 psi??? If you were to take a 2.0 turbo and a 2.0 s/c and gave them the same internals such as cams, pistons, rods, valves and such to enhance the forced induction flow, and both were running at around 23psi what would be the outcome of each. In saying outcome, lets say from a standing start to 135MPH. It seems if they are both forcing the same amount of air, the only difference would be the torq band. A Turbo would come on slightly stronger and probably a little more because it requires no drive train power to force air into the intake, yet the s/c would more then likely have greater torq at lower RPM.... Also, the turbo is running an inter cooler I believe, so what is the difference in temperature of the air being forced into the intake between the two?

thoughts?????

Formula Special Jedi- 900 CBR RR turbo (car weighs 750lbs)
ksmutek is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #22 of 198 (permalink) Old 10-05-2008, 06:22 PM
Newcomer
 
ksmutek's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 17
bump...

Formula Special Jedi- 900 CBR RR turbo (car weighs 750lbs)
ksmutek is offline  
post #23 of 198 (permalink) Old 10-06-2008, 03:17 PM
Banned
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: SoCal
Posts: 384
what if?
P1mpsy0r1c3 is offline  
 
post #24 of 198 (permalink) Old 10-06-2008, 05:50 PM
Newcomer
 
ksmutek's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 17
I'm sorry I don't believe "what if?" acts as a comment, question, or answer to the post I made. Perhaps you over thought the post and/or were stoned...

~Please try again~

Formula Special Jedi- 900 CBR RR turbo (car weighs 750lbs)
ksmutek is offline  
post #25 of 198 (permalink) Old 10-06-2008, 06:25 PM
Banned
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: SoCal
Posts: 384
LSJ>LNF

does that help? or were you even aware that the two had different motors
P1mpsy0r1c3 is offline  
post #26 of 198 (permalink) Old 10-07-2008, 03:36 PM
Forum Regular
 
blkbalt06's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: London, OH
Posts: 192
Send a message via AIM to blkbalt06
i say LNF>LSJ. its only limitations are parts availability, and the tranny not being able to support much more power. my belief is the internal construction of the tranny is made of powdered steel, not as strong as machined steel. direct injection is the sex when it comes to efficiency. plus, with the cobalt ss/tc, upgrade intake, charge piping and intercooler and you're probably looking at 20+hp.

now on to ksmutek. in your situation, its hard to say. it would most likely come down to traction. with 23 psi in boost, thats a lot to the wheels. in a fwd car, its gonna be tough to put all that to the wheels. launch control with the LNF cobalt(ss/tc) will help a bunch. also no lift shift will help keep the turbo in boost, eliminating a drawback to turbocharged applications. the ss/sc is intercooled as well, but its generally referred to as an aftercooler. the coolant runs by the intake mani if im correct, then goes to a front mounted heat exchanger and goes through the process again.

blkbalt06 is offline  
post #27 of 198 (permalink) Old 10-07-2008, 04:10 PM
Newcomer
 
ksmutek's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 17
I was unaware they used different engines.

Formula Special Jedi- 900 CBR RR turbo (car weighs 750lbs)
ksmutek is offline  
post #28 of 198 (permalink) Old 10-07-2008, 04:37 PM
Forum Regular
 
blkbalt06's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: London, OH
Posts: 192
Send a message via AIM to blkbalt06
oh yeah. same displacement, 2.0L. the LNF(tc) is direct injected, has variable valve timing, upgraded bottom end and other features to boot. dont get me wrong the lsj is a great motor, i love it.

blkbalt06 is offline  
post #29 of 198 (permalink) Old 10-07-2008, 08:05 PM
Banned
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: SoCal
Posts: 384
i think youre right blkbalt. it is going to come down to traction.

but also with a complete motor build, youre going to need a turbo upgrade and were getting into upgrades.

i personally would pick the sc.
P1mpsy0r1c3 is offline  
post #30 of 198 (permalink) Old 10-08-2008, 07:19 AM Thread Starter
Veteran
 
gibsonj4's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Florida
Posts: 575
Send a message via AIM to gibsonj4
I still stick by my sc's for big displacement. Just a matter of opinion.

2V Mustang GT - Cammed/Sprayed - The "Mustake" - Sold
2010 Cobalt 2LT - SOLD!
Chrysler 300C Hemi K&N & Tune
2005 Cobalt SS Supercharged - E85 TVS 2.9 - SOLD!
2001 Corvette C5 6MT
gibsonj4 is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Reply

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



Posting Rules  
You may not post new threads
You may not 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