GWHITE75

I've built several high compression, big cammed motors. BB & SB, boy did they sound good and run well. Not a very good daily driver and poor gas mileage.

I've put a 6-71 S/C on a small block in a Vette. Boy did it look good and run well. Not a very good daily driver and poor gas mileage.

I turbo-charged a 4 cylinder to make it think it was an 8 cylinder. Boy was it fun. Good daily driver and gas mileage. NOT a Vette!!!

Next week, I get and ECS S/C Kit put on my C6. Thank god for technology. It will run even better than stock, still be a great daily driver and get good gas mileage.

Why super charge?????? Becasue I can!!!!!

clockworks

Exactly.

Btw, the answer to the OP's questions is this: "cuz it's cheap." It's a good hp/$ mod.

Now if you said, "all costs being equal, which would you choose, super or turbo?" ... then you'd have an interesting debate...

clockworks

Also like some people have said, modern day supercharging systems are great... car drives likes it's 100% stock until you get on the gas (cuz of a bypass valve). What's not to like about that?

I'd rather have that than some super edgy high strung NA car...

shopdog

An engine is an air pump, anything that makes it pump more air lets it burn more fuel and make more power. The advantage of blowers and turbos is that they are very efficient air pumps, much better than any NA engine of the same displacement can be, no matter how radical the cam or how big the air passages. But perhaps even more important, when the power demand isn't there, The blower, and particularly the turbo, car doesn't penalize you with excessive fuel consumption or rough running. They allow the engine to operate as a tractable stock engine when power demand isn't high. Radically cammed NA engines can't do that. They don't have the engineering to allow them to efficiently handle all power demands from mild to wild. Turbos and blowers do.

Chemical supercharging, whether N2O or nitromethane, supplies the engine with more oxygen without wasting mechanical energy to obtain it. They are the most efficient and economical methods of making large amounts of power. Their only limitation is that you have to reload them, usually before you have to refuel the car. That makes SC/TC better for a car that must meet very high power demands for long stretches, ie circle track or road race cars. But almost no street car needs to do that. At most, a few seconds of maximum power are required on the street, or the drag strip. That makes chemical supercharging the logical choice for those activities.

LS2-Zomb!e

SPEED

C7GrandSport

I think I'm throwing away my Cd's and ipod and going back to 8-tracks. Old school, baby

The Clevite Kid

"There is no replacement for displacement."

Hmmmm. You must not be familiar with the theory that trumps it:

The only thing that beats cubic inches is rectangular dollars.

Try buying a new diesel pickup truck withOUT a turbocharger. My 1984 C-10 came without one - that is REAL old-school.

Try buying a high performance piston airplane withOUT a turbocharger. Or do you prefer old-school Piper Cubs?

Delta1

i dont think any one here answered your question. it's a weight issue. you can add more power with a blower without significant weight gain. a bigger displacement engine adds more weight and the object is to gain power and reduce weight....thats why people use superchargers.
keep it light and tight...ok, time for all nerds to turn on the flames and let me have all the formula's and grammar corrections....oh yes,,,and my favorite..."i read in another post that"....

User 020720

I think you can retrofit a turntable somewhere under the hood, heck just get rid of the fuel injection for a 4-barrel carb and you can sit the 45's on top of the air cleaner.

HighPerformanceLS1

Lorna, I agree with you.

I have both turbo and supercharged cars, and I think it's a cheater in the same way as I think nitrous is. They are fun to drive, yes, but by my calculation it's still a cheater.

Not that there's anything wrong with forced induction cars/trucks, I just prefer the natural, pure feel from NA engines.

I do think it's neat when a person supercharges or turbocharges a NA vehicle. Supercharging is also old school, so that's cool in my book.

BUT

I don't think a Corvette should be blown in any way when it leaves the GM factory.

I also don't think a Corvette should be a rear mid-engine vehicle.

One of the best things, for me, about the Corvette is its history and heritage. Forced induction and rear mid engine Corvettes are not part of that, IMO.

Before someone incorrectly points out at me thinking I don't think the Corvette should advance, there are other ways; VVT, AFM, multi valve, Direct Injection, even OHC (part of the Corvette history in ZR1), can make the Corvette keep its well deserved engine dominance without straying away from its history.

IMO

eboggs_jkvl

A woman asking men about being blown? I have twins on the camaro and I'd like another set of twins on the Corvette. Men's cars were meant to be blown! Stock engine manners and crazy bursts of HP on demand. Nothing better.

Elmer

SimonStern

Well, if we are going to stick our heads in the sand about available performance adders, why not go back to carburetors? Why not get rid of Active Handling, mag ride, ABS and steel belted run-flat tires.

You know, it's 'cheating' if you have lightweight alloy wheels, wheels should be made of steel (or mabey stone?)

And on the road course, it's REALLY cheating to use bolsters on the seats (and seatbelts for that matter.) You should go "old skool" and have a bench seat and no belts.

I am glad Corvette is considering mid-engined chassis designs. I'd like to see them consider all-wheel drive too. FI, sure why not, AFM, sure why not.

The Corvette has been used many times as an engineering platform and showcase for GM. I want them to push the cutting edge. I want more technology, better technology and ultimately: A FASTER, MORE RELIABLE, FUEL EFFICIENT CAR!

JFTaylor

By far the best looking engine compartment I've seen

dark_phantom

Well put by both shopdog and clevitekid.

GotVett?

Use to, I'd hold on to my car for 10 years or so but the last few I leased. I only kept each of them for 3 to 3 1/2 years.

If I knew that my Vette was the one that I'd be keeping for a good while, there's no question that I'd be Supercharging or the equivalent. Making sure everything was done correctly, of course.

How is making yours all that it could be, cheating? Could be getting more for your money that way . . . right?

C7GrandSport

Thank you (even though it's got a supercharger)

C7GrandSport

Those with Callaway cars might be upset to learn they're not included in the Corvette's history and heritage.

huckleberrydude

My Granpa used to walk uphill through a snowstorn 9 miles both ways to get to school.





I like to go fast and I also appreciate classics. My car is not a classic, at least the one we are talking about is not.

aTX427

After a very detailed debate on building the most cubes possible on a NA aluminum LS based engine, I decided to go FI. Why?...you have to spend about as much money by the time everything is said and done only to make what 650hp.

You need an ultra-light rotating assembly with exotic materials (5x more expensive), sheet metal intake (10x more expensive), custom headers for the tall deck (2x more expensive), loose streetability with a big cam, etc., only to make what...650hp. The SAM school made 700HP NA / 900hp on juice, but that was with deck spacers and 501ci on a max effort build.

Making 1000hp on a FI 427ci engine should be a walk in the park and idle better than the above mentioned engine for about the same price. You can run much less expensive rotating assemblies, use standard block configurations, don't need to worry as much about intake and just flow the crap out of the exhaust side. If you ever wanted to add an extra 100-150hp, change a $75 pulley and add better fuel.

Is is cheating? Not my fault your not blown.

pTr73

Hmmmm, FI or modified engine?????

Id rather buy a S/C and install it myself rather than have some machine shop tear my entire engine apart and rebuild it. FI in my opinion is alot easier and probably cheaper to add a copious amount of HP to the car in one shot. Another great thing about it is that it is reversible also. I can remove it if I were to trade the car in or sell it to someone. FI can instantly add up to 200HP!