AnswerID: 7643 Submitted: Sunday, Oct 20, 2002 at 00:00
Janset
replied:
Hi Ashly.
Bit of a late reply but here is my 2 cents worth. I have a 92 Troopie fitted with an Intercooled turbo. I made enquires for about 2 years reading everything I could lay my hands on relating to the old argument turbo Vs Supercharger.
I chose Turbo, it is install and forget! A good idea though is a turbo-timer. Fuel economy no change from pre turbo days if you drive the same which I do, guts, tons, turbo lag, in a diesel virtually un- noticable unless you are REALLY looking for it.
Why not a supercharger, it is so I am told subject to regular maintenance as the vanes in the fan and seals and belt are subject to wear and to fix those costs money.
My intercooled turbo has done 30,000 km and still as good as the day it was fitted. If turbos weren't as good as superchargers then why do all heavy trucks and earth moving equipment have them fitted. Long haul trucks talk distances on hundreds of thousands of kilometre, must say something about turbos.
Regards
Reply 3 of 4
FollowupID: 3515 Submitted:
Sunday, Oct 20, 2002 at 00:00
Colin posted:
as to
servicing S/C every 50ks the oil needs to be changed and the bushes are able to be replaced. The vains dont have to be touched at all.Also there are no seals that have to be replaced, least these units can be serviced, unlike a turbo which needs a rebuild when something goes wrong, any thing from $800 upwards, and you cant compare a truck turbo to a 4x4 turbo, look at the size and the application entirely different. When a turbo lets go thats it you are on the side of the road waiting for help,S/C take the belt off and keep driveing. Truck manufactueres now days are now looking at fitting a S/c Look at Volvo they are doing a lot of rechearge in this field. My S/C charger has done 20,000ks, 10,000 through the desert, no problems, and i dont need a timer to idle down, and dont need a intercooler to put in front of my radiator. I aaaalso did a lot of research between the two, but it wasnt till i drove the two that i made my mind up, no comparison, S/C left The intercooled turbo for dead, in all aspects of 4x4 driveing. Regards Col
FollowUp 2 of 3
FollowupID: 3517 Submitted:
Sunday, Oct 20, 2002 at 00:00
Janset posted:
Thanks Colin for that. It looks like your information and experiences outway the advice given to me. I still do not regret fitting the turbo. Incidentally, my intercooler lays flat on top of the motor and air is passed through a scoop in the bonnet which increases the turbo out put by about 15%. Just as a point of interest, on the dynometer, my rig gave an increase of 47% at 1500 rpm, 40% at 2000 rpm 39% at 2500 rpm 27% at 3000 rpm and 20 % at 3500 rpm. The boost is 12-13 psi, Air fuel 19.5 @ 3000 rpm ...... I don't know about you but most of my work is done between 1500 and 2500 rpm and in that range the increase is quite healthy and I do not have to worry that I may be loading up the bottom end.
Regards
FollowUp 3 of 3
