what are the pros and cons?

advantage of a supercharger = take off
advantage of a turbocharger = top speed

well, is is only in my own understanding.

This might help. http://www.automotivearticles.com/Supercharger_vs_Turbocharger_.shtml

Quote from: be989 on December 03, 2004, 03:58:53 PM
This might help. http://www.automotivearticles.com/Supercharger_vs_Turbocharger_.shtml

a very informative read indeed!  

Quote from: mz_danni on December 03, 2004, 03:27:50 PM
advantage of a supercharger = take off
advantage of a turbocharger = top speed

well, is is only in my own understanding.

it may actually be harder to take off with a supercharger kasi you're making all that torque at a low rpm... launch it on street tires and malamang you'll end up just smoking the tires no end...

top speed naman is gear, rpm, box limited so top speed should not change.

i see, thanx. understood.
i was concluding kasi sa Miata Cup.
the supercharge one always ahead when taking off.
but in the long run, nai-iwan (or nahahabol) ang supercharged ng turbo in the straights.

i have no facts , just visual observation.

no problem. that's what the board is here for:)

is it true that mas madali i-mentain (minimal mentainance cost) ang supercharge than a turbocharge?

may nabasa ako somewhere na zero maintenance daw ang supercharger...

I'm not sure about it though.  

not true, is there such a car in this world that is zero maintenance??? Imagine, not changing your oil for like about 3 years straight, or the plugs...

What i'm trying to say is that a turbocharger can be also similar to a supercharger in terms of maintenance. It just has to be tuned right and done well the first time...

The Charger will always have the torque advantage at lower rpms, but the turbo charger can have both the torque and hp in the mid range, eliminate turbo lag, and the turbo will be your best bet..

i think the zero maintenance that articles refer to is that you won't have to open up the supercharger assembly for a long time. around 100k miles or so on the modern units.

this is compared to turbines which sometimes need to be rebuilt with new seals, etc

Supercharger 4 me.

There are many types of superchargers with different design intended, so producing different results. Just take note.

Typical centrifugal SC has different implementations much like different engine designs to address different requirements for the same market segment.

The roots type twinscroll SC are very different to centrifugal SCs.  As most people here said, SC is typically for better lower ti mid-end rpm while Turbo goes towards the top-end of the rpm range. meaning very near red-line.

If you look at Mercedes Roots type SC, their aim was to icrease torque not HP. Yes, there is some hp gain but the torque gain was the main intend in that design. Most stock SC are very conservatively tuned., so bigger hp/torque can be extracted rather easily. eg holding higher boost levels.
typical example in JohnCooper S conversion to get 200HP from 160 hp stock Cooper S.

Important point to note is a "strange" SC designed in Denmark called Rotrex. It claims 120K rpm turbine speed where most centrifugal SC runs out of steam at 50K rpm!. Proof is the AA Tuning Rotrex M3 and the Rotrex powered 350Z that is tearing up the tarmacs in the US.

i got the idea. .  
thanx guys.

The V-belt is the weakest link in the SC setup. I was told some American belts called Gates made belts that lasts for 150K miles!!!. These from the truck days and are really super-heavy duty belts.

Nice thing about SC setups is that at low boost of 6 psi or lower, there is no need for inter-cooler. You will lose 1 to 1.5 psi going into the intercooler.

SCs last and lasts unlike turbos.