Results 1 to 18 of 18

which is better for the price ?

This is a discussion on which is better for the price ? within the Forced Induction forums, part of the LSx Technical Help Section category; a vortech supercharger or a rear mounted turbo? on an ls6...

  1. #1
    get p'owned blk_ss02's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Marshall, TX
    Age
    29
    Posts
    50

    Black
    02 Camaro SS

    which is better for the price ?

    a vortech supercharger or a rear mounted turbo? on an ls6

  2. #2
    Rice Killa JwMonE99's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Myrtle Beach
    Age
    27
    Posts
    5,561

    Black With T-Tops
    96 Z28 M6

    Vortech for sure.
    STS is not worth it

  3. #3
    Member Tman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Woodstock, GA
    Posts
    469

    Black
    2000 WS6

    Go with Vortech.

  4. #4
    Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    allenhurst GA
    Age
    41
    Posts
    369

    onyx black
    1999 formula firebird

    Vortech gets my vote...just cause i like my ground clearance and wish i had more..* stupid SLP exhaust**

  5. #5
    Rodzilla Tha Cavity Filla zero_proto's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    San DEEEE Eggo
    Age
    33
    Posts
    2,985

    teal
    99 Z28 with an SS complex

    i would also say vortech. The money it would cost to get the sts to run like a champ would be a little more than a vortech setup.

  6. #6
    Junior Member Websy21's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Alberta, Canada
    Posts
    93

    Metallic Pewter
    2001 Trans Am WS6

    Vortech FTW, wouldn't waste my money with STS!

  7. #7
    Awaiting Activation Liquifire's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    central wisconsin
    Age
    39
    Posts
    702
    wow.........I see who is winning this battle!!!

  8. #8
    Member cailey37's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Mississippi
    Posts
    832

    Silver
    1998 Pontiac Trans Am

    If you threw in say a custom turbo system, or one like APS then I'd say them hands down over Vortech.....but like everyone is saying STS is junk....

  9. #9
    Junior Member WHPLASH's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    Macomb, Mi
    Posts
    43

    NBM
    2000 Camaro SS #5108 A4

    Why not a Procharger as a choice?
    2000 Camaro SS # 5108 NBM A4
    10.94 @ 124.70 1.71 w/ broken tranny (563 rwhp/477 rwtq)
    Forged LS6 347, D-1SC #10, Patriot LQ9 Heads, LG G5XB Cam, SLP headers, Alky Control, Yank SS3600, BMR suspension
    http://lsx.streetfire.net/video/a7c7...2000a4809f.htm

  10. #10
    2004 HEAD/CAM CTS-V 9t8z28's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    doylestown, Pa
    Posts
    6,818

    SILVER
    2004 CTS-V

    Quote Originally Posted by WHPLASH View Post
    Why not a Procharger as a choice?
    x2?

  11. #11
    get p'owned blk_ss02's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Marshall, TX
    Age
    29
    Posts
    50

    Black
    02 Camaro SS

    well im not 100% sure if i want to go forced induction or not yet, and im just trying to get some opinions before i do anything
    2002 SS LS6,A4, hooker lts, flowmasters, lower rear control arms, sub frame conn. , k&n filter, BFG G-Force KDW T/A 245/45/18-295/35/19, C6 Rims

  12. #12
    2004 HEAD/CAM CTS-V 9t8z28's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    doylestown, Pa
    Posts
    6,818

    SILVER
    2004 CTS-V

    Quote Originally Posted by blk_ss02 View Post
    well im not 100% sure if i want to go forced induction or not yet, and im just trying to get some opinions before i do anything
    If you want opinions, then Procharger is the way to go!

  13. #13
    get p'owned blk_ss02's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Marshall, TX
    Age
    29
    Posts
    50

    Black
    02 Camaro SS

    thanks everyone i appreciate the help

  14. #14
    Bawlz Deep andrew rs's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    ohio
    Age
    29
    Posts
    786

    gold
    2000 honder accord

    aps or custom turbo gets my vote, sc robs power from the crank, turbos take what would be useless exhaust and turns it into boost... turbos ftw!!!

  15. #15
    TunedbyFrost.com Tuner Frost's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Richmond VA
    Posts
    2,415

    LS1.com Sponsor
    GM Tuner

    Quote Originally Posted by andrew rs View Post
    aps or custom turbo gets my vote, sc robs power from the crank, turbos take what would be useless exhaust and turns it into boost... turbos ftw!!!
    The SC may steal HP from the crank, but turbo systems have their own losses through back pressure, especially up top. That seems to be commonly left out when people knock the SC.

    The SC setups are more reliable for the long haul, and are very competitive with the turbo on the track, not to mention being easier to effectively and repeatably race.

  16. #16
    The Bandit Wesman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    NJ
    Posts
    4,033

    SGM
    1998 Trans Am WS6

    Quote Originally Posted by Frost View Post
    The SC may steal HP from the crank, but turbo systems have their own losses through back pressure, especially up top. That seems to be commonly left out when people knock the SC.

    The SC setups are more reliable for the long haul, and are very competitive with the turbo on the track, not to mention being easier to effectively and repeatably race.
    Exactly, turbos are not "free power". When you think of it in terms of exhaust, just picture removing free flowing 1 3/4" Longtubes and replacing them with extremely restrictive manifolds with a turbine wheel in the way of exhaust flow. Drive the car back to back with no boost and you won't believe the difference in power and torque, especially top end. So you're losing a bunch just changing the exhaust setup.

    Then you have to figure in the backpressure created in the exhaust manifold between the exhaust port and the turbocharger. A lot of exhaust gas backs up in there, expecially at high RPM's, where the backpressure is too great to move the amount of exhaust that's trying to exit the cylinders. So there's quite a significant loss there too, and it gets exponentially higher with the more boost you are pushing, since forcing more air in means more air is going to need to be expelled on the exhaust stroke. If you've ever seen a turbo exhaust manifold glowing cherry red you'd know what Im talking about.

    The supercharger requires engine power to run, but you can keep your free flowing exhaust (LT headers, duals, ect) and when you're not under boost, you're only losing a couple of HP to turn the rotors/turbine. Not sure of what kind of power it saps under boost, but the newer models are supposed to be quite efficient as far as parasitic losses.
    Last edited by Wesman; 10-02-2008 at 02:40 PM.

  17. #17
    Rice Killa JwMonE99's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Myrtle Beach
    Age
    27
    Posts
    5,561

    Black With T-Tops
    96 Z28 M6

    Quote Originally Posted by Wesman View Post
    Exactly, turbos are not "free power". When you think of it in terms of exhaust, just picture removing free flowing 1 3/4" Longtubes and replacing them with extremely restrictive manifolds with a turbine wheel in the way of exhaust flow. Drive the car back to back with no boost and you won't believe the difference in power and torque, especially top end. So you're losing a bunch just changing the exhaust setup.

    Then you have to figure in the backpressure created in the exhaust manifold between the exhaust port and the turbocharger. A lot of exhaust gas backs up in there, expecially at high RPM's, where the backpressure is too great to move the amount of exhaust that's trying to exit the cylinders. So there's quite a significant loss there too, and it gets exponentially higher with the more boost you are pushing, since forcing more air in means more air is going to need to be expelled on the exhaust stroke. If you've ever seen a turbo exhaust manifold glowing cherry red you'd know what Im talking about.

    The supercharger requires engine power to run, but you can keep your free flowing exhaust (LT headers, duals, ect) and when you're not under boost, you're only losing a couple of HP to turn the rotors/turbine. Not sure of what kind of power it saps under boost, but the newer models are supposed to be quite efficient as far as parasitic losses.

    Very well said


    300RWHP, 341RWTQ
    1/8 mile 8.32 at 83.97
    1/4 mile 13.049 at 105.24

  18. #18
    Desert Boat Guy SouthernBornThriller's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Charlotte, NC
    Age
    28
    Posts
    862

    Black 2002 T/A M6
    Green 1997 Ram 4x4

    Quote Originally Posted by Wesman View Post
    Exactly, turbos are not "free power". When you think of it in terms of exhaust, just picture removing free flowing 1 3/4" Longtubes and replacing them with extremely restrictive manifolds with a turbine wheel in the way of exhaust flow. Drive the car back to back with no boost and you won't believe the difference in power and torque, especially top end. So you're losing a bunch just changing the exhaust setup.

    Then you have to figure in the backpressure created in the exhaust manifold between the exhaust port and the turbocharger. A lot of exhaust gas backs up in there, expecially at high RPM's, where the backpressure is too great to move the amount of exhaust that's trying to exit the cylinders. So there's quite a significant loss there too, and it gets exponentially higher with the more boost you are pushing, since forcing more air in means more air is going to need to be expelled on the exhaust stroke. If you've ever seen a turbo exhaust manifold glowing cherry red you'd know what Im talking about.

    The supercharger requires engine power to run, but you can keep your free flowing exhaust (LT headers, duals, ect) and when you're not under boost, you're only losing a couple of HP to turn the rotors/turbine. Not sure of what kind of power it saps under boost, but the newer models are supposed to be quite efficient as far as parasitic losses.
    You know...I've been sold on turbos for quite awhile now for when the bank account finally says "Yes! You can finally afford forced induction!"

    After reading this though I think I may have to reconsider.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. N2O price
    By Footlead in forum Nitrous
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 02-11-2009, 09:11 AM
  2. price for car
    By Colten W. in forum LT1
    Replies: 14
    Last Post: 07-27-2008, 08:00 AM
  3. Replies: 10
    Last Post: 01-27-2007, 12:59 PM
  4. Price?
    By PureSpeed in forum General Help
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 06-01-2006, 12:10 PM
  5. Best price for bmr sfc
    By GottaHaveLS1 in forum Suspension and Handling
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 03-08-2006, 07:45 PM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •