Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 13
  1. #1
    mstennes's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    On the Columbia River above a Dam
    Posts
    843
    +1
    1

    Turbo vs Supercharger pros & cons?

    Ok I know they both increase air volume and hp, but is the turbo better than say the Rude SC? I know turbos are free hp but with a lag but that can be dealt with also now. The gear/belt driven supercharger has parasitic loss but is it the much? What are the advantages of the turbo thats making everyone change over?


  2. #2
    The ski's have taken a "backseat" to the Corvette DarthAWM's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Odessa, TX
    Posts
    5,364
    Quote Originally Posted by mstennes View Post
    Ok I know they both increase air volume and hp, but is the turbo better than say the Rude SC? I know turbos are free hp but with a lag but that can be dealt with also now. The gear/belt driven supercharger has parasitic loss but is it the much? What are the advantages of the turbo thats making everyone change over?
    Basically, it provides more boost. Rude tops out around 15-16. The turbos can put out 22 psi all day long and still have more in reserve(22 is about the limit of a Riva ECU with 50lb injectors which is so far the best named and explained setup)

    And you also can add the fact that the turbos need less frequent rebuilds and do not have clutch washer and bearing issues.

    The downsides are $$$$$ and lag.

  3. #3
    DaveC's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Central Oklahoma
    Posts
    2,362
    +1
    41
    The most boost that I have seen with the Rude charger is 13.9 PSI and the usual it 13.5-13.6 PSI @ 8550 RPM with the best speed of 84.2.





    Quote Originally Posted by DarthAWM View Post
    Basically, it provides more boost. Rude tops out around 15-16. The turbos can put out 22 psi all day long and still have more in reserve(22 is about the limit of a Riva ECU with 50lb injectors which is so far the best named and explained setup)

    And you also can add the fact that the turbos need less frequent rebuilds and do not have clutch washer and bearing issues.

    The downsides are $$$$$ and lag.

  4. #4

    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Gonzales, La
    Posts
    2,145
    +1
    9
    A 'con' of turbocharging is lots and lots of additional heat in the hull.

    The 'pro' of turbocharging (less parasitic drag) should pick it up around 10-20 hp at the same boost level as the supercharger.

    Another 'pro' of turbocharging is less parasitic drag at cruise, which translates into better fuel economy.

    And of course, the turbocharger can make more boost.

    The supercharger is cheaper and more reliable since it's installed by the OEM, aside from clutch issues.

    Mike

  5. #5
    David 1 FAST VE's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    Southaven, MS
    Posts
    1,958
    +1
    1
    What I do not understand is why it is taking the turbo guys 16+ lbs of boost to do what the Rudes are doing with less boost?

    I figure if the Rudes are going 83+ why are the same skis not going 86+ with the turbos?

  6. #6

    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Lexington, Ky
    Posts
    1,656
    Theres more to boost than just the PSI number. The amount of air CFM's that is flows are also very different, and the boost curve is much different for a turbo then a supercharger, IE a supercharger has a very linear boost curve, pretty much a straight line increasing with RPM, with a turbo, its much more of a an instant none to full boost. A Supercharger only makes full boost at max RPM, where a turbo can reach full boost by 4k-5k RP{M depending on the setup. Not to mention the turbo is powered by an untapped power source that is usually just disposed of out the exhaust. So being that the turbo is powered by superheated exhaust gases, that are "free" so to speak, not taking into consideration back pressure a turbo introduces, where a supercharger is actually driven off of the crank and takes HP to make HP.

    A turbo is much more efficient then a supercharger, The main downside to using a turbo in a jet ski/Waverunner application in my mind, is dealing with all of that heat is now being radiated into your engine bay. You want to make damn sure it is heat wrapped, or heat sheilded, etc.. To ensure it doesn't melt things, like fuse boxes, coolant lines, your a$$, etc..
    Last edited by boostaholic; 01-14-2008 at 08:54 AM.

  7. #7
    Quote Originally Posted by 1 FAST VE View Post
    What I do not understand is why it is taking the turbo guys 16+ lbs of boost to do what the Rudes are doing with less boost?

    I figure if the Rudes are going 83+ why are the same skis not going 86+ with the turbos?

    I think also since the turbo guys are running a much steeper pitch prop then the rude guys it takes more boost to spin the prop to the disired RPM

  8. #8
    EZ Dock of Long Island Shibby1485's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Long Island, NY
    Posts
    9,464
    +1
    4
    Quote Originally Posted by cosmicMS3 View Post
    I think also since the turbo guys are running a much steeper pitch prop then the rude guys it takes more boost to spin the prop to the disired RPM
    this statement has alot more truth in it than you may realize what you just said... very basic fundemental thought... turbo skis are running steeper pitched props yet turning the same desired RPM, which means they are making more HP...

    HOWEVER, for such a drastic change in prop pitch and HP and the "relatively" small speed gain, that is further proof that 4-tec enthusiasts need to stop building HP and stop worrying about what's under the seat and spend the eternity of their lives reading the yamaha section on how to tune the hull... rideplate angles, pump shoe angles, intake grate options, pump setbacks, pump extensions, etc etc etc

    JD 1 isn't going over 100 mph only because of the horsepower... need to tune the hull/driveline to convert the HP into speed

    any further advancements in HP on the 4-tec platform, IN MY OPINION, is a waste of money for the consumer, because once we collectively find the secret sauces to the RXP hulls and pumps it will be far more affordable speed than constantly adding more boost and more air and better exhaust.

  9. #9
    cheatin' piston popper addicted's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    north jersey
    Posts
    6,188
    +1
    176
    Quote Originally Posted by Shibby1485 View Post

    HOWEVER, for such a drastic change in prop pitch and HP and the "relatively" small speed gain, that is further proof that 4-tec enthusiasts need to stop building HP and stop worrying about what's under the seat and spend the eternity of their lives reading the yamaha section on how to tune the hull... rideplate angles, pump shoe angles, intake grate options, pump setbacks, pump extensions, etc etc etc
    And that's a fact-Jack!

  10. #10
    NoMo-xp4me's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    St. Louis MO
    Posts
    284
    I think there is more to the story of a ski than just it's top speed number. The turbo is going to out-torque the s/c all day long in the mid/last leg of the race.

    More torque = more fun for me. Getting the lag figured out should just be a matter of tuning.

    Also----the people running the Rude/B-kit etc. have spend countless hours perfecting their impeller setup. They are running exactly the impeller/venturi that gets every ounce out of the ski. Most of the turbo setups are just getting going---they are running the same skat 15.5/22.5 @ 15-16lbs that is set up for 20+ psi.

    JMO.

Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

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

Similar Threads

  1. fzr turbo vs supercharger
    By tealgreen2000 in forum Yamaha PWC Performance (4-stroke)
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: 04-29-2012, 12:30 PM
  2. Stock vs Mods - Pros and Cons
    By brittrich in forum Sea Doo Open Discussion
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 04-23-2012, 10:40 AM
  3. Post Hydrodrag Discussion....Turbo VS Supercharged
    By ARNYGOLLOTT3 in forum 4-Tec Performance
    Replies: 104
    Last Post: 12-09-2008, 10:17 AM
  4. rxp vs rxpx pros and cons.
    By jamiej in forum 4-Tec Performance
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 11-08-2007, 02:07 PM
  5. build up turbo vs. supercharger ?
    By breon in forum 4-Tec Performance
    Replies: 15
    Last Post: 10-02-2007, 06:14 PM

Posting Permissions

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