Turbo or supercharge and NA gas engine

[kw_00]

Fellow gearheads good morning, had a discussion with a coworker about turbo charging or supercharging an GM 6.0, Ford 6.2 or Ram 6.4. This is not a you need a diesel or buy a diesel question. Just your thoughts on what option would you chose on a 3/4 ton gas job for towing and why. I’m familiar with LS engines very much so and know that bottom end stock holds very well with boost. So not a question of what blows up or what truck is better.... just your thoughts. Thanks guys have a great day.

[wilber1]

jus2shy wrote:
Well, Volvo is using both Super and Turbo charging for their next round of "Mainstream" engines for the XC90 SUV's Ward's Auto

316 HP out of a 2 litre 4 banger.

[jus2shy]

Well, Volvo is using both Super and Turbo charging for their next round of "Mainstream" engines for the XC90 SUV's Ward's Auto

[kw_00]

Turtle n Peeps wrote:
Dodge goes the supercharger route.

OP, some reading for you. Not much to do with towing but a whole lot of HP and torque! :B

Thanks at 44 and still learning something new everyday!

[1stgenfarmboy]

It takes around 1,000 hp to turn just the blower on a top fuel engine, just throwing that out there as a fun fact.


but that is on an engine that produces about 18hp per cubic inch.

[Turtle_n_Peeps]

Dodge goes the supercharger route.

OP, some reading for you. Not much to do with towing but a whole lot of HP and torque! :B

[PDX_Zs]

valhalla360 wrote:


Outside of dragsters and certain other racing applications, no one uses superchargers. .

I know. GM, Dodge, Audi, Mercedes, and Volvo would never stick a supercharger on any (relatviely) mainstream vehicle. 😉


On a semi.unrelated note, CAFE has 100% distorted the design of engineering of vehicles. In a quest to hit CAFE numbers, we have seen the switch to little turbo engines from large displacement. Absent CAFE, and if consumer demand were the only design requirement, we would not likely be seeing these types of motors.

[TexBohunk]

Let me correct myself. The 6.2 in the Raptor is NA. The lightning was supercharged, but was a the 5.4. Would love to see what a supercharge 6.2 could do though. Ford seems to be going with turbos these days.

[TexBohunk]

Me Again wrote:
If Ford thought force air was good for the 6.2, they most likely would have done it by now. Ecoboost 6.2!

The importance of factory warranty is becoming more important then ever as these new trucks continue to become more and more complex. So I do not understand why anyone would modify a vehicle in a way that would allow the manufacturer to void the warranty.

Ford did, the first Raptors had supercharged 6.2. But as far as long term and heavy towing heat would probably be and issue in an SD truck.

[valhalla360]

Big difference between Ford building a turbo engine from the ground up with extensive testing
vs
Bolt a turbo on an hope for the best.

At modest boost pressures is will likely be OK but will never be as good as one designed from the start for forced induction.

Outside of dragsters and certain other racing applications, no one uses superchargers. The main advantage is instant power. While a turbo is spooling up the supercharger is already pumping air into the system. The downside is it eats up some of the power to run the supercharger.

With a towing application, the turbo lag really isn't a big issue as no one expects to do a 4sec 0-60 pulling a 30' trailer.

The big advantage of a turbo is it gives you the power when you need it (at the cost of additional fuel consumption) but when you don't need it, you get the better efficiency of a NA engine. If you stick with the V8, you don't gain any efficiency advantage.

Ford did it by downsizing the engine. Under light load, a NA V6 is more than enough power to maintain highway speeds, so you get efficiency when just running around town but if you need hard acceleration or occasional towing, you have the available power. Since the CAFE rules don't include towing, they didn't take a hit pumping a lot of fuel into the engine while towing.

[PDX_Zs]

Can’t speak for the other brand, but for Chevy there are several good supercharger options for the Gen IV and V motors.

There are plenty in use to show good reliability and a large tuner knowledge base.

Our 6.0 is getting a Whipple SC next year. It has 80k on it and every sign shows that even blown it should do another 80k. These motors are super robust and another hundred or so HP is no big deal.

[ShinerBock]

Apparently Dodge didn't find out about heat in their 6.4L Durango. My 2012 Ecoboost engine oil temp never got anywhere close to the 297F that thing got even when towing another 3.5k more than the 7k that thing did up and over the Rockies.

[Turtle_n_Peeps]

noteven wrote:
Turbocharging mimics high compression which = high torque rise at low rpm which = useable power where a street vehicle needs it. Turbochargers can be "mapped" to provide high manifold pressure at low rpm.

Not that familiar with supercharging but doesn't mechanical supercharging add air in a more linear fashion which = more torque at higher rpm therefore more hp at high rpm for example?

But who wants to listen to that all afternoon towing?

No, yes and maybe. :B

Sure you can map compressors where they come in early but then you will choke your hot section down so much it causes bad things to happen. (like high EGT's poor mileage ect)


No, a supercharger is instant. Right at the hit of the throttle. That is why you see them on top fuel cars instead of turbos. I hated superchargers when street racing because it was so easy to smoke the tires. I liked turbos when street racing because they came on so soft it was a lot easier to get them down the road without tire spin.

On a prepped track it was a different story. I loved the supercharger because it was so instant and instant at a low RPM where with a turbo you had to build boost on the line and get the RPM up to make power.

Kris, heat is the biggest enemy of engines. Ford found this out with their Ecoboost.

Bottom line: It's easy to make power but very, very, very hard to control heat in an engine that makes a lot of power.

[noteven]

...

[kw_00]

Love this discussion so far, the truck that came up in our discussion was a tundra in fact with the 5.7. It will be supercharged soon by him when time permits. I never had a supercharger and more familiar of course with turbo charged engines. I totally agree as well that this won't make a gas job pull like the diesel counterpart. My concern was heat created by such a unit when pulling a camper... I've seen videos of trucks getting supercharged but nothing discusses issues with heat. I think most of them aren't used for pulling anyway. Supercharged units start with 6psi boost and of course according can be bumped up with certain mods I believe. I could not do this to my truck despite my desire to always build or creat something of sorts. I have an upcoming 1969 Chevy 350 rebuild starting in the spring for my C10 but plan to leave it all stock of course. Does anybody know how GM engineered the 4.8 with a supercharger? It was a hot rod type truck produced a few years ago and I think that it came with a manual transmission. I curios how they accomplished the heat issue, I thought we had someone on this board at one time with one but I could be wrong. Anyway thanks again for all the imput, it's great to read and learn. Kris