Supercharged HP vs N/A HP

[XSELLR8]

So I had this thought enter my mind reciently. Perhaps someone can enlighten me. As far as our stock internals go, is boost a killer mostly because of the added pressure and heat on the engine compared to a N/A build? Could our engines potentially handle more horsepower N/A than forced induction, or is it a horsepower threshold that will break a stock bottom end no matter how it's making the power (N/A or Supercharged) ?
If anyone can catch what I'm getting at, chime in

[FastBlueMach1]

as far as your connecting rods are concerned, horsepower is horsepower.

[BluMach03]

if you have an egine thats only good for so much power, its only gonna hold up to that...it could be n/a, boost, or nos. power is power.

[UIN2IT]

Plus it woudl be hard to get the power of a SC by going strictly N/A, unless you built up the bottom end anyhow.

Another thought to ponder....hypothetically.

Two Identical cars (Suspension, make model, mods, same driver) ONLY DIFFERENCE is one has a SC and the other built NA.

Both have the same HP/TQ Numbers ........ which car is faster 1/4mi and 0 - 60?

[Mach828]

Originally Posted by UIN2IT

Both have the same HP/TQ Numbers ........ which car is faster 1/4mi and 0 - 60?

I'm curious about the same thing.

And I think the OP's question is interesting. But I don't think anyone has taken their 4v to 500NA hp to test and see how well the engine can handle it. Where as many have taken in there with FI.

[blown03Mach1]

Originally Posted by UIN2IT

Another thought to ponder....hypothetically.

Two Identical cars (Suspension, make model, mods, same driver) ONLY DIFFERENCE is one has a SC and the other built NA.

Both have the same HP/TQ Numbers ........ which car is faster 1/4mi and 0 - 60?

Everything being equal with the exception of the s/c, the n/a should be quicker as the n/a car would weigh less and thus increase the hp/weight ratio over the s/c car.

[04azuremach]

You're not going to make 450 rwhp NA without building the bottom end anyway, so question is moot.

[st0ck Mach 1]

To the OP, as far as the forced induction goes...its mainly detonation that is the killer. But side by side on the stock internals there is a threshold of pressure where the components (rods mainly i think) will fail and they dont care whether its forced induction or naturally aspirated.

[XSELLR8]

I know you'll not make the same amount of power n/a than supercharged, I was just curious about how differences in heat and pressure may make it harder for the engine to handle it. I'm curious to know if a car (not necessarily a Mach 1) might be able to handle 450 HP n/a better than 400 supercharged.. As far as which car would be faster with both the same horsepower, it would be hard to determine because making a n/a engine put out as much as a blown one would require an entirely different set up..they'd be so different... It would be fun to find out

[67mustang]

Not that it matters buri had a n/a 347 fox body that dynoed 402rwhp 359torque.... Same car had a 306 with a Paxton and at 8lbs had 412rwhp and 349 torque... The n/a is still running... The charged car cracked a piston... Both motors had same pistons.... Just cheapy forged Keith blacks...

[04azuremach]

Originally Posted by XSELLR8

I know you'll not make the same amount of power n/a than supercharged, I was just curious about how differences in heat and pressure may make it harder for the engine to handle it. I'm curious to know if a car (not necessarily a Mach 1) might be able to handle 450 HP n/a better than 400 supercharged.. As far as which car would be faster with both the same horsepower, it would be hard to determine because making a n/a engine put out as much as a blown one would require an entirely different set up..they'd be so different... It would be fun to find out

Ok I'll go on with the hypothetical. A supercharged car is going to weigh more and require more fuel. It will require less aggressive cam profiles to make the same HP as an N/A car so it would be more tame for street driving. Depending on whether it's a PD blower or a centri blower it could have more or less low end torque respectively. However, mid range on both a centri and PD should have more torque. An NA car can make up for this in gearing. Once upon a time JTCobra and 03AV8R had NA cars running 4.88 rear gears. A blown car making the same HP as them would have a lot of trouble getting traction with the extra torque. An FI car will be effected by heat more than an NA car especially if there isn't an intercooler. HOWEVER, an FI car will receive a greater benefit in COLD weather than an NA car.

So really, there are a LOT of variables. I'd go supercharged for the streetability, less expense and just the fact that it's cool and drops panties. Just saying...

[Stopsign32v]

Supercharger takes power to make power. 450rwhp blown is not the same amount of stress on parts as 450rwhp n/a. assuming the same shift point.

[04azuremach]

Originally Posted by Stopsign32v

Supercharger takes power to make power. 450rwhp blown is not the same amount of stress on parts as 450rwhp n/a. assuming the same shift point.

In racing applications, this is true, but for street cars and regular unspirited driving, we can assume the blown car will have less of a compression ratio and have less wear and tear. The blower isn't draining a lot of power when the BPV is open and there isn't any pressure force against it during normal driving.

Like I said.. variables...

[Stopsign32v]

Blowers take power to make power plus put added stress on the crank. That is why on stock internals you will see a turbo mustang make more "safe power" than a blown one. Not to mention using less rpm to make the same amount of power. But that's a different boat.

[Bwahl602]

Originally Posted by blown03Mach1

Everything being equal with the exception of the s/c, the n/a should be quicker as the n/a car would weigh less and thus increase the hp/weight ratio over the s/c car.

I wasnt sure where you were going with this at first... but okay ill buy it, there is definately weight savings..

It all depends on the setup of the engine. Where the power kicks in

A 450hp twin screw supercharger powered car (that makes power from 2000-redline) is WAY more FUN to drive than a drag N/A motor that makes most of its power about 4000RPM..because its a dog leaving a stop light (same thing with cars with too large of a turbo.. they are fun highway cars, but thats it
As far as driving on the street that is

[04azuremach]

Originally Posted by Stopsign32v

Blowers take power to make power plus put added stress on the crank. That is why on stock internals you will see a turbo mustang make more "safe power" than a blown one. Not to mention using less rpm to make the same amount of power. But that's a different boat.

I think you mean less boost to make the same amount of power. That's just how it is.

I know they take power to make power, but when you're cruising around at 2,500 RPM's on a lower compression motor when you're not running any boost, it's probably LESS stress on the motor considering the lower CR and the use of an intercooler. I'm in agreement that while being raced, the blower is harder on the motor, but cruising around, it isn't any harder on the car.

[ASH302]

my thoughts on this is that your going to spend more money on a high HP n/a set up compare to a F/I car.

i would say at cruising like stated above the s/c is going to be harder on the motor, but lets say if the motor is built for the s/c than its prob alot easier on the motor compare to a stock mach vs a built motor s/c mach

kinda like comparing a 03/04 cobra vs 03/04 mach, i would say they are about equal on how much the motor takes

ASh

[Mach828]

Originally Posted by 04azuremach

I think you mean less boost to make the same amount of power. That's just how it is.

I know they take power to make power, but when you're cruising around at 2,500 RPM's on a lower compression motor when you're not running any boost, it's probably LESS stress on the motor considering the lower CR and the use of an intercooler. I'm in agreement that while being raced, the blower is harder on the motor, but cruising around, it isn't any harder on the car.

He is saying that a supercharged car might put down 450hp, but if its 70% efficient that means that maybe 100hp is being used to turn that blower and gets wasted in the process. So the engine might be seeing the stress of 550hp over 450hp.

However, since a turbo car is driven by exhaust instead of the crank, then its more efficient, which in theory, would allow it to make the same power with less stress on the engine.

[04azuremach]

Originally Posted by Mach828

He is saying that a supercharged car might put down 450hp, but if its 70% efficient that means that maybe 100hp is being used to turn that blower and gets wasted in the process. So the engine might be seeing the stress of 550hp over 450hp.

However, since a turbo car is driven by exhaust instead of the crank, then its more efficient, which in theory, would allow it to make the same power with less stress on the engine.

Dude, I understand that the engine is using HP to make power, but it's making that 450 at WOT. I'm talking about CRUISING here. I think it's not harder on the engine than being N/A.

[Stopsign32v]

Just because you are cruising doesn't mean the supercharger isn't putting added load on the engine.

[04azuremach]

Originally Posted by Stopsign32v

Just because you are cruising doesn't mean the supercharger isn't putting added load on the engine.

At a vacuum? It's just an accessory at that point. Like throwing on a second alternator. The more pressure in the manifold, the harder it is to turn the impeller against that force... but at a vacuum, how is there any extra load?

[littlemags]

Originally Posted by Stopsign32v

Just because you are cruising doesn't mean the supercharger isn't putting added load on the engine.

VERY MIN... when not in boost..

[littlemags]

Originally Posted by 04azuremach

At a vacuum? It's just an accessory at that point. Like throwing on a second alternator. The more pressure in the manifold, the harder it is to turn the impeller against that force... but at a vacuum, how is there any extra load?

agree....with same vaccum at no boost it is the same.

[halemach1]

Originally Posted by 04azuremach

Dude, I understand that the engine is using HP to make power, but it's making that 450 at WOT. I'm talking about CRUISING here. I think it's not harder on the engine than being N/A.

Why are you talking about cruising when this thread is about peak power?

[04azuremach]

Originally Posted by halemach1

Why are you talking about cruising when this thread is about peak power?

This thread is about the durability of motors here. OP said nothing about peak power so the next time you pull something from your butt, try to at least remember what you ate so you know where it came from.