rotrex supercharger - Toyota Yaris Forums

Vanderkitten · 05-17-2007, 03:43 AM

Your supercharger will rob more MPG from your motor than a turbo, and there is no way around it. It adds mechanical drag to you motor whether you're on the boost or not. You lose some rev-speed as well (my non-mechanical term for how fast your motor revs).

The Supercharger tends to be easier on the motors since the boost occurs at lower RPMS, and Turbo spools up later meaning you spend more time in high-revs and detonation is more likely.

IMHO, Superchargers are great for low-revving motors where a Turbo would not spool up and provide adequate advantage or heavy vehicles like any Mercedes or a truck.

I am not sure why the mini cooper S has a supercharger... seems like the wrong move to me... sign me up for the turbo!! After having one in my Jetta GLI 1.8T I'd do it again... but I can see the desire for quick lane changes and possilby autoX being smart applications for the SC.

Turbo v. SC... Shoot it out!! I'd pay to see that!

eTiMaGo · 05-17-2007, 04:24 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Vanderkitten

I am not sure why the mini cooper S has a supercharger...

The new model Cooper S is now turbocharged

Papamoon · 05-17-2007, 12:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Vanderkitten

Your supercharger will rob more MPG from your motor than a turbo, and there is no way around it. It adds mechanical drag to you motor whether you're on the boost or not. You lose some rev-speed as well (my non-mechanical term for how fast your motor revs).

A turbo really kills your low end due to all the back pressure of forcing all your exaust through a hole the size of a half dollar.

Turbo&Auto · 05-17-2007, 01:02 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Papamoon

A turbo really kills your low end due to all the back pressure of forcing all your exaust through a hole the size of a half dollar.

This is total BS. With a properly sized turbo you can have s/c like response with....are you ready....top end performance too

This is my Accord with the old turbo setup. Its a DSM manifold with a Big 16G turbo. Full boost well before 3K. The car shredded tires coming out of turns no matter the gear. EASILY walk Mustangs!

Carvin'07 · 05-19-2007, 09:22 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Turbo&Auto

This is total BS. With a properly sized turbo you can have s/c like response with....are you ready....top end performance too

This is my Accord with the old turbo setup. Its a DSM manifold with a Big 16G turbo. Full boost well before 3K. The car shredded tires coming out of turns no matter the gear. EASILY walk Mustangs!

What size of block are you talking about? There is no way a 1.5L 1NZFE will make that much low end power and top end as well. We just cannot flow that much air...our F-series head is also a big limitation.

On a side note, with a Big16G you should have been able to make much more power. I had a DSM for 3 years and some of my buddies with the B16g were making close to 300 FWHP (disconnected centre diff) on an otherwise stock 2.0L engine. Looks like you had some airflow restrictions.

Carvin'

largeorangefont · 05-19-2007, 11:53 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Carvin'07

What size of block are you talking about? There is no way a 1.5L 1NZFE will make that much low end power and top end as well. We just cannot flow that much air...our F-series head is also a big limitation.

On a side note, with a Big16G you should have been able to make much more power. I had a DSM for 3 years and some of my buddies with the B16g were making close to 300 FWHP (disconnected centre diff) on an otherwise stock 2.0L engine. Looks like you had some airflow restrictions.

Carvin'

Agreed. We aren't going to see much over 200 lb/ft of torque (if it even gets there) with this motor in a stock configuration. The good news is that you can run a small turbo that will spool well and it wont fall off on the top end like the chart above.

Carvin'07 · 05-19-2007, 01:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by largeorangefont

Agreed. We aren't going to see much over 200 lb/ft of torque (if it even gets there) with this motor in a stock configuration. The good news is that you can run a small turbo that will spool well and it wont fall off on the top end like the chart above.

Hear hear! I think you might get to 200ft-lbs, but you wouldn't stay there for too long.

A small conventional bearing turbo (e.g. T-25) or medium sized ball-bearing (GT-25R!!

well maybe a bit big) would probably be best for this engine. Quick spool is what we need really.

Jujufruit · 05-19-2007, 07:16 PM

Does anyone know why Toyota is so adamant about using the F series engines? I mean, there are so many limitations about the F series heads from a NA standpoint (unless you got lotsa $$$) that it seems to put Toyota in the lowest level as far as engine performance goes.

I've always found that torque is the main enemy of a FF if it springs to early, being able to have a broader powerband with a high HP low torque motor seems to perform the best overall. Guess I just don't understand why Toyota doesn't want performance motors when the 4a-g motor was so popular, and even that wasn't the most Uber, but it did have amazing qualities.

I guess I really like the Vitz, but I'm really dissapointed with the motor so far, seems like the Fit has much more potential, especially from a NA standpoint.

05-17-2007, 03:43 AM	#1
Vanderkitten Drives: 2007 Yaris Hatchback Join Date: May 2007 Location: Berkeley, CA Posts: 243	Your supercharger will rob more MPG from your motor than a turbo, and there is no way around it. It adds mechanical drag to you motor whether you're on the boost or not. You lose some rev-speed as well (my non-mechanical term for how fast your motor revs). The Supercharger tends to be easier on the motors since the boost occurs at lower RPMS, and Turbo spools up later meaning you spend more time in high-revs and detonation is more likely. IMHO, Superchargers are great for low-revving motors where a Turbo would not spool up and provide adequate advantage or heavy vehicles like any Mercedes or a truck. I am not sure why the mini cooper S has a supercharger... seems like the wrong move to me... sign me up for the turbo!! After having one in my Jetta GLI 1.8T I'd do it again... but I can see the desire for quick lane changes and possilby autoX being smart applications for the SC. Turbo v. SC... Shoot it out!! I'd pay to see that! __________________ Dave V- Creator-Vanderkitten- Clothing for Women Who Kick Ass! Many thanks to our sponsors: Weapon-R http://weapon-r.com Megan Racing http://www.meganracing.com Les Schwab Tires http://www.lesschwab.com 317 graphics http://www.317graphics.com

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Switch to Linear Mode Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
anyone with Blitz supercharger?	yrsdrgn	Performance Modifications	52	08-24-2010 07:57 AM
Gauge for Interest in JR Supercharger	redglare45	Performance Modifications	36	09-17-2009 08:04 AM
Looking for a Supercharger! (Yaris 1.8 TS)	ItalianYaris	Forced Induction Forum	14	04-27-2007 04:42 PM
Greddy xB Supercharger	Papamoon	Performance Modifications	2	02-09-2007 03:08 PM
Supercharger?	iampachino	Performance Modifications	15	08-24-2006 04:51 AM

05-19-2007, 07:16 PM	#8
Jujufruit Drives: Camry Join Date: Feb 2007 Location: Lakewood Posts: 9	Does anyone know why Toyota is so adamant about using the F series engines? I mean, there are so many limitations about the F series heads from a NA standpoint (unless you got lotsa $$$) that it seems to put Toyota in the lowest level as far as engine performance goes. I've always found that torque is the main enemy of a FF if it springs to early, being able to have a broader powerband with a high HP low torque motor seems to perform the best overall. Guess I just don't understand why Toyota doesn't want performance motors when the 4a-g motor was so popular, and even that wasn't the most Uber, but it did have amazing qualities. I guess I really like the Vitz, but I'm really dissapointed with the motor so far, seems like the Fit has much more potential, especially from a NA standpoint.