Yep, thes T-Types here are an autos...
look at that sucky 60' times... daily driven btw...
(thats where stall converters come in to play)

 

I'll take the Turbo spool up sound over the blower whine anyday. I think turbos are not widely used because of the exhaust plumbing involved where as a supercharger just requires a bracket and belt......It is much cheaper to produce a blower kit than a turbo kit....... modern day quick and cheap attitude.


Ricer accessory? I think not.

Nos, turbo, yellow stickers, wannabe = ricer accesory

 

Vin - pick up the new issue of MM&FF, they have some pics of a stang with a turbo the size of a novi3000, you won't think of turbos as a ricer thing anymore.

I think the idea of a turbo on an L is great, but my vote will always go for a twin turbo. Even if it's only 6-8psi pe blower. With todays technology and our 5.4's we could minize lag to a point were fine with.

S/C take power to make power
Turbos make power from wasted power

 

Coolva I'd bet those are exceptions and not the rule, am I correct? By the way, go test drive an automatic WRX, then try the manual one to see what I'm talking about.

-Ollie

 

As far as the sound, I'll take the aggressive growl of the S/C over the whistle of the turbo anyday. Turbos can be very effective, but are not w/out compromises; long air passages, extremely hot air outlet temps, & they restict the exhaust system somewhat. Turbo lag is always going to be an issue when drag racing. I know their are some really fast turbo cars out there, but S/C's are the rule in Drag Racing. Have you noticed any Top Fuelers using turbos, they use S/C's because the power is instantly available. I own a turbo car as well as the L, and like them both, but the S/C is simply more fun to drive. The greatest advantage a Turbo has over a S/C is in daily commuting, the turbo has little effect on fuel economy when driven conservatively, while the S/C constantly consumes power to spin it.

 

I think it will be great to see turbos applied to these trucks. I will be interested to see how it works out and how the price runs on the turbo setup. I bet it will be an expensive setup.
I am curious if anyone has seen this setup on automotive applications. In my line of work we have GM 4.4 MW emergency diesels and this puppies have a blower arrangment that is driven off the engine untill the exhaust gets enough energy then an over running clutch dissengages and it is driven by the exhaust only.

 

I have owned two turbocharged vehicles. In 1978 I purchased a new Buick Regal Sport Coupe. This was a great car (in '78 remember) and I loved it. It was the first of the turbo'ed Buicks and only had about 175 hp stock (with some major turbo lag). I learned the hard way, however, to let the turbo spin down before shuting the motor off. Cooked the turbo bearings and had to replace the unit a month before I sold the car. (Newer turbo designs have, of course, reduced this potential problem.)

My second turbo vehicle was a '91 GMC Syclone which I bought used from my neighbor in '93 with 12,000 miles on it. As most of you know, the Sy's (and the Typhoon's) were (and are) very quick and fun little trucks, albeit a little fragile. (They will give a stock L fits in the 1/4) I loved mine. Drove it for 6 years and sold it with just 24,000 total miles on the odo for about what I paid for it originally. (They only made 3,000, so if they are in good condition, they hold their value very well.) The Sy/Ty's have some turbo lag but it's not too bad once you get used to it.

I sold my Syclone to buy my '99 Lightning and have never regreted it. The L is in a different league. It's my favorite vehicle of all time, and that includes a bunch of great cars I've owned over the years. And, yes, I much prefer the supercharger to a turbo -- especially for everyday driveability. That instant torque and horsepower is, as we all know, addictive.

Mike
'99 Black