Turbo vs supercharger
#1
Turbo vs supercharger
I have a 1974 442 and I want to increase the horse power. I'm not looking to build a race car but I just want some more power. What is better to put on a car like this, a supercharger or a turbo. It has the original 350 rocket v8
#2
you would probably be better off staying naturally aspirated and just build the motor up some. . power adders arent for the faint of heart.
For what its worth thou i like turbos over super chargers. A super is constant boost. a turbo car can be driven without being into boost.
For what its worth thou i like turbos over super chargers. A super is constant boost. a turbo car can be driven without being into boost.
#4
#5
what kind of power are you looking to make with it?
with any engine, headers are a good starting point. you can also do cam, some head work (port, big valves), etc. cam or headers are probably your best bet for cheap power, comp cams offers great stuff for olds motors, from just the cam to full kits with lifters, springs, etc.
with any engine, headers are a good starting point. you can also do cam, some head work (port, big valves), etc. cam or headers are probably your best bet for cheap power, comp cams offers great stuff for olds motors, from just the cam to full kits with lifters, springs, etc.
#6
I think supercharging is a great idea, instant torque, doesn't require high rpm's (easy on valve train), doesn't need excessive rear end ratio's, intricate computer tuning or head porting. The factories are going to supercharging to get neck snapping acceleration, the new blowers are very reliable. Good post.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
Wildcard
Racing and High Performance
21
January 20th, 2013 12:06 PM
84oldsDelta88
Eighty-Eight
5
April 18th, 2009 10:30 PM