Which would you prefer for your G? Turbo- or Super Charging

[PalmerWMD]

Which would memebrs prefer?

A turbocharger or supercharger for teir G?

Advantages for Supercharger: more immdiate response even at lower revs.turbocharger: more gains for a given installation weight, may be less expensive as well, adapt better to altitude changes.

Both types of kits are finiching the development process as we speak, with several vendors.

Any preferences?

Vote in our poll!

Fred...Supercharger, turbo charger or?

[rydwhite]

Fred, Good question. I have been thinking the same. I would probably go with the turbo because it will probably be less expensive and the gains you mentioned. I wouldn't make a real decision until I have seen some numbers for both set-ups. NOS would be ok, but I would really prefer a turbo or supercharger. Didn't Aries install NOS on his wife's G35 sedan?Ryan

[PalmerWMD]

Well I think the hp gains would be generally the same, most tuners seem to shoot for 330-350 hp out of the VQ35de with forced induction, wether turbo or s/charger.

I expect most turbos to be less complex and a bit lighter at the same hp as superchargers.Of course superchargers offer more immediate response at lower revs.

You can make a turbo as responsive as a supercharger by making it a twin turbo, but as result complexity will match that of a super charger.

Both technologies are very mature at this point, and it is probably best to look at the individual kit offered by a given vendor, rather than make a generalization as I have attempted above.

Having said all that, I have always been partial to s/c's.

Fred...

[PalmerWMD]

Ye sAries NOS system seems to work very well.

As a "purist" I prefer forced induction over NOS, even tho my current car has a <very> professional and well sorted NOS set-up done by previous owner.Actuates a 100 shot on "kick-down" pressure plate.

Fred...

[Onizuka]

if i actually owned a G35 (any body want me to kill somebody in exchange for a G35?) i would do the supercharger.

[dougs98Q45]

Do superchargers have the longevity problems that turbos have (due to the heat)? If not, that could mean that superchargers are better pricewise, over time... I know a turbo's high heat can (besides shortening it's life) also negatively affect other things under the bood.... The studs for the exhaust manifold were on their last legs on my last car. If I had to do the exhaust manifold gasket on my old car one more time I would have been up the creek.....

[PalmerWMD]

Do superchargers have the longevity problems that turbos have (due to the heat)? ..

Both superchargers and turnbochargers generally don't last the lifetime of the engine they are feeding.

Fred...

[rydwhite]

How long do you suppose a supercharger or turbocharger lasts? Generally speaking of course.

[PalmerWMD]

it very much depends.A turbocharger that is well treated (idle a couple minutes before take off and before shut -down, <plus> using good synthetic oil that's not too thin) can last the life of the car.But an abused turbo can last as little as 30,000 miles.

SC wear is more constant and seems to vary less.For example Eaton SC's on the factory sc'ed Jags last about 80,000 to 100,000 miles.

Fred...

[PalmerWMD]

Remember folks, the above is talking abut the actual <chargers>, not the engines to which they are attached.

Fred..

[Aztek72]

Remember folks, the above is talking abut the actual <chargers>, not the engines to which they are attached.

Fred..

For a moderate application I would prefer a centrifugal supercharger (big fan of ATI and Vortech) over a turbo. For higher boost applications I would take a turbocharger anyday.

[Aries]

my baby is bottle fed and fully grown 175 shot wet on stock internals no problem

[PalmerWMD]

175 shot wet on stock internals no problem

your G takes a 175 shot?:eek:

Wow!

Fred..

[Aries]

What'd you think I'd do to it?Some pansy 50 shot?nah.double valve springs from GReddy for the 350TT apligaions work really nicely to eliminate valve float that would cause problems in the higher RPMs.And soon I'll have my new system in to tune the G35 computers more easily. Right now I'm having to pull them out of the car and hook them up to a massive harness.

[Onizuka]

you got pictures of your G35 aries? or is it a sleeper like the SS?

[nlzmo400r]

Ye sAries NOS system seems to work very well.

As a "purist" I prefer forced induction over NOS, even tho my current car has a <very> professional and well sorted NOS set-up done by previous owner.Actuates a 100 shot on "kick-down" pressure plate.

Fred...

u have NOS on teh Q??!!

[pcbootleger]

I'd have to go with a turbo setup. bothe chargers are nice but you just cant get that sexy sound of a turbo on a supercharger. Gotta love the blow off valve sound! ...vroooom swoosh

[G35 PIMP]

I agree, the sound is like nothing else.

Also, the turbos seem to give you more potential for big HP gains.

[DenverG35c]

I've owned 2 cars with Turbos and had no mechanical troubles. Living in Colorado also would influence that choice.

But the big question is: What happens to my warranty? I doubt that Infiniti would look kindly on this type of modification.

[nlzmo400r]

as soonas you put on that turbo, yhour warranty is as good as done, im sure

[Stu Segal]

I've put blowers (superchargers) on vehicles - they provide both awesome performance and are very cool. (There's nothing quite like the sound of a blower when you crank it up).

The last one I did was on a Harley. OK, it sounds odd, but I can tell you it turned my 2-wheel Milwaukee Tractor into a sportbike killer. With the kind of results I got on the H-D (dyno'd at 40% increase in hp), just think what a blower would do for a G35.

My vote - supercharger.

[theslik1]

It's my experience that turbo installations are more complex than superchargers on V-type engines. The exhaust routing for a single turbo is fairly complicated; the routing for a twin turbo setup maybe a bit less so. The intake routing is no picnic, either. Having said that, I'm seeing more turbo setups on V configurations, especially the F-body LS1 Camaros and Firebirds. The "old school" supercharger guys have finally figured out that the top end HP potential of turbochargers is much higher (turbos are basically an efficiency gain).

The lag concern can always be addressed with a 75-shot of nitrous, but realistically it shouldn't take a very large turbo(s) to hit 350+ whp in the VQ, with full boost coming on around 2500-2800 RPM.

Any thoughts?

[nlzmo400r]

well hell, Greddys TT set up was putting 334rwhp very low in the rev band and that was at 5.4 lbs of boost, so another 3lbs of boost and you're easily at 36orwph or so

[theslik1]

well hell, Greddys TT set up was putting 334rwhp very low in the rev band and that was at 5.4 lbs of boost, so another 3lbs of boost and you're easily at 36orwph or so

Sounds realistic to me...lag wouldn't be an issue at that low a boost level.

Go turbo!

[nlzmo400r]

they said it was almost no lag, and it boosted at around 24oorpm or so

[vq35de]

I want the alpine S/C (supposedly being made by dreamworkes)

They say it should come with a 3yr/36,000 mile motor and blower warranty.

Still torn between N/A and S/C, leaning towards N/A

[theslik1]

If choosing between forced induction and NA I'd always go forced, although NA would be more reliable just by probabilty (fewer parts + lower intake pressure= less likely to break). Turbo and SC setups can be very reliable, however. It all depends on how far you're willing to push the envelope.

The beauty of forced induction is the amplification effect it provides to intake and exhaust enhancements. The 5 HP you would gain with an intake mod on an NA car becomes a 10-15 HP gain with forced induction. Particularly with turbos, because you never have to worry about a lack of exhaust backpressure reducing your torque (the turbine provides enough even with an open pipe). This isn't much of an issue with modern engines controls anyway.

[gsxtasee]

I don't see how a SC is more complex than a TC... I have worked on both and SC's are pretty simple. a nice centrifugal SC whould be a peic of cake to install compared to a turbo, ESPECIALLY on teh V-type engine. I was, however, under the impression that the SC's needed bearing refurbishment at ~60-75k miles... unsure about that though.

The real question is for what application do you want the power? circuit racing? SC , drag racing (low boost)--> SC, drag racing (high boost)--> turbo, cheap go fast to fu*k with the muscle car guys--> N2O... all around driving, probably SC because thye are easier to drive for people who aren't accustomed to dealing with turbo lag and the ensuing rush of power...

Personally, I seem attracted to turbo cars.. just can't get enough.. I would run a turbo system.. but I wouldn't buy the G35 b/c it didn't come turbo'd though... personally speaking.

[booger]

I would go SC...with turbos you have alot more install time...more mods...more heat....you can get more power with them.....but with this engine....you can take it only so far on a stock bottom end...and the Sc can get there with less mods and less heat

[Cold_Zero]

Looking at the engine bay of the G-35 Coupe I am not sure how you would get a Twin Turbo setup in there with out moving a lot of crap around. I would also think with a supercharger attached to it, you would need a bigger hood to clear the unit itself. I am sure that a twin turbo setup for the G-35 will be pretty costly.