What do you guys think?

the only tihng i dont like is nos.. its just cheap.. cheating gas is what we call it here

It's a tough one between a blower and a turbo. For FWD applications a turbo is the hotshot, you can get insane power outputs with a T3 / T4 hybrid. However there's nothing quite like the whine of a supercharger on a Mustang Cobra.

But you can turbocharge ANYTHING, even a lawnmower if you wanted. A supercharger is heads / intake specific and one supercharger fits one motor, or two at best.

I like to be "Blown"

ya jdogg i love seeing videos of street bikes with turbos, hitting like 300km's, i would never get a street bike cuz i know id kill myself on it trying to se howfast i can go

Edit: i wrote hate instead of like (who wouldnt like 300km bikes with turbo chargeres)

Quote: Originally Posted by $SOLID$ Necro I like to be "Blown"

I'd rather be Stroked

both eventually lead to boreing

Quote: Originally Posted by 4rm4g3dd0n both eventually lead to boreing

Ya when u get use to it you gotta add sometihng else for more fun, thats whats good about turbos u can add another one lol

Depends on application.

Guess it depends on what you plan on doing with it. All other things being equal, I'll go for all motor everytime in a daily driver. Statistics say it will last longer and be much cheaper to maintain in the long haul and I would tend to agree. I know they are a helluva lot easier to work on. And words like "super" and "turbo" tend to make insurance rates higher and gas levels drop faster.

For instance compare say these three choices in cars in about the same price range:

Supercharged Chevy Cobalt with a 2L engine 205 h.p.
A turbo charged Volkswagon Golf or Jetta 1.8L 180 h.p.
A Acura RSX Type S with a 2L normally aspirated engine 210 h.p.

Pretty even as ponies go, but if you look at the torque ratings:

Cobalt 200 fpt @ 5600 rpm
VW 1.8L 173 fpt @ 1950 rpm
Acura 2.0-S 143 fpt @ 7000 rpm

The super charged engine is the clear winner in torque but at a pretty high r.p.m. Quarter mile.
The turbo peaks early. Tight turns, lots of shifting. Mountain roads.
A normally aspirated engine with modest torque but outrageous rpm. Open road car.

However a well-tuned 1st-gen Probe GT would bend all three over and rape them in the ass,with more wtq. and more whp. And cost a quarter as much.

Too bad the stock 5-speed Mazda transmissions blow balls

Let's see:

Displacement 153.00 CU IN. | 2507.7 cc. | 2.5 L.
Valves 24 Valves
4 valves per cylinder.
Valvetrain DOHC
Power 164.0 HP @ 5,600.0 RPM
Torque 160.0 Ft-Lbs @ 4,000.0 RPM

Don't think so sparky, but thanks for playing the "I talk about my Probe way too much game".
Seems 2 extra cylinders and a extra half liter displacement don't buy you much nowadays.

The 1st gens are 2.2L 165whp 190wtq stock. They are nice cars but the transmissions are crap. And the GT's are really the only nice ones. Some guys rebuild the trannies with Contour internals to combat that but they still suck.

They would have been *really* popular if the F2T was 4 valves per cylinder instead of 3.

Quote: Originally Posted by Dr3w the only tihng i dont like is nos.. its just cheap.. cheating gas is what we call it here

Don't forget if you start using N.O.S. to much at a time you end up burning the engine up and will have to ether rebuild it or buy new motor.Seen alot of drivers rely to much on N.O.S. for power and not let the motor do the work and also not being properly setup to run N.O.S.

yep lol, talking baout nos u all see fast and furious ? lol whats up with that ? nos in the states make you go light speed loll ?

I dont like probes very much, mostly becuase they are made pretty cheap. Paintjob in specific.

I see so many with sun bleached/cracking/rusting/sanded looking faded paintjobs.

What I find funny - most all of you talking about positive displacement/nitrous oxide seem to have taken a few to many pages from popular culture.

Here's a tip: Hollywood is a lousy teacher and usually unable to inform anyone about anything. "Performance" magazines give a thimble of knowledge and a glass of marketting. AND... if you want performance misinformation, do a google search for any automotive performance topic.

Quote: Originally Posted by Iateronmly What I find funny - most all of you talking about positive displacement/nitrous oxide seem to have taken a few to many pages from popular culture. Here's a tip: Hollywood is a lousy teacher and usually unable to inform anyone about anything. "Performance" magazines give a thimble of knowledge and a glass of marketting. AND... if you want performance misinformation, do a google search for any automotive performance topic.

Gee, and I watch Tuner Transformation all the time and they just love slapping a turbo or nitrous tank on a stock engine without doing a thing to it. Does this mean I should abandon my plan of strapping a propane tank full of nitrous onto my riding lawnmower? It's already got a mulcher back exhaust system, 19" inch wheels and a rear wing the size of a card table. Well, it is a card table actually.

Quote: Originally Posted by TYCOON I dont like probes very much, mostly becuase they are made pretty cheap. Paintjob in specific. I see so many with sun bleached/cracking/rusting/sanded looking faded paintjobs.

No way a car company tried to save a few dollars. I have never heard of that ever. Also your in Canada where there is snow. They use salt for the roads which eats away at the paint. And dont forget most cars that are metal and older exposed to alot of salt and rain will rust.

I had to respond to this one.............I selected supercharging because mainly I'm of the OLD school......where Funny Cars and Top Fuel Dragsters still rule (producing around 6,000 horsepower )............Below, is a link to where (if you have the money....heh) you can purchase some of the best built Ford crate motors...........and they even have a twin-turbo crate motor that puts out 2100+ horsepower.............I'd like to put one of these babys in a 2005 Mustang.........
http://www.bennettracing.com/crate.html