HOW THEY WORK-PROCHARGER VS TURBO (WHAT WORKS BEST?)

IS A TURBO BETTER THAN A PROCHARGER? MORE BOOST OR HP? CHECK OUT THIS COMPARISON BETWEEN THE TWO FORMS OF FORCED INDUCTION WHERE I COVER NOT ONLY HORSEPOWER, TORQUE AND BOOST PRODUCTION CHARACTERISTICS OF THE TWO (FULL DYNO GRAPHS), BUT THROW IN TRACTION AS WELL. WHAT GOOD IS POWER IF YOU CAN'T PUT IT DOWN? DOES A BLOWER HAVE IMMEDIATE BOOST? IS THERE TURBO LAG? HOW DO THE TWO SYSTEM COMPARE FOR STREET USE? FOR TRACK USE? WHICH ONE WOULD YOU CHOOSE?

[@bradysmith3024]

Pro chargers seems like the obvious choice for a street build. Great video.

[@blakefelice6625]

if for packaging reasons if nothing else.

[@-Jason-L]

Turbo makes more power earlier, vs the procharger. Your logic is broken.

[@blakefelice6625]

@@-Jason-L my logic includes traction and parts breakage. Does yours?

[@iamLexxKelsey]

Now I see why no prep cars would rather run pro charger

[@JosephNnbs]

You really do always post what’s going on in my brain. Thank you

[@mxguy2438]

In the drag racing world, the shape of the power curve means almost nothing with a torque converter that keeps the motor in a 500-1000 rpm range for the entire run.

[@vnv8dude]

Yep which is why hp is king on the strip

[@justinward5928]

why does it keep the rpm so low if theres more power to be had up higher

[@mxguy2438]

@@justinward5928 if I understand your question correctly, you're thinking of stock style torque converters that couple around 1500-2000 rpm. Performance/racing torque converters will move that up significantly. In a drag car, the conveyor will couple at near peak power at full throttle i.e. 5k+ rpm. This is too much of a compromise though for part throttle driving where the car will feel unresponsive and sluggish at low throttle because the engine will need more throttle input and more rpm to create the same change in vehicle speed.

[@davidcarpenter9232]

Good 1...

[@iamLexxKelsey]

Wrong....unless u have no traction issues most drag cars are over powered these days it's more hp management going on these days

[@warrenlucier5796]

Yeah I see the supercharger giving a linear power curve and the turbo just overwhelms the chassis; sometimes less is more.

[@-Jason-L]

Lol. That's why we use electric boost controllers.

[@joeyjojojr.shabadoo915]

Gearing, Transmission choice and proper setup can go a long way to level the playing field and even help the Supercharger to shine. Let's say for instance that 2 cars weigh the same, same rear tire, one is Procharger and the other is Turbo charged. In this example, the Turbo car runs a 4.11:1 with a Powerglide and perhaps 3500 stall. The Procharger car needs only run something like 4.56:1 and a Turbo400 with 4000 stall to make the most of it's powerband. This will make sense to those that understand each setup. These values mean nothing......ONLY WHEN COMPARED TO EACH OTHER FOR REFERENCE. Just an off-the-cuff example. Be nice. ;)

[@travisabrahamson5092]

4.11s with turbo?? I always run "highway gears".. Like 3.42 to 2.73 on my turbo cars. It seems to work better for me anyway. 👍

[@jedwards100able]

​​@travisabrahamson5092 with 29" tall tire drops to 3.80 gear with Power Glide gear ratio so his comment makes sense in eighth mile. Tells me you don't know anything about gear ratios in transmission, stall speeds, & drag racing vs street car.

[@daviedood2503]

It all depends on where you're racing. Are u racing on the highway? Or are u racing on winding S shaped roads? Lots of left and right turns etc. One setup will prevail over another.

[@dsm4959]

Great stuff Richard. I think a lot of guys would be interested in seeing a comparison between a Whipple and ProCharger on a 6.2L. Keep the Vids coming!

[@CapnBubbaa]

Thanks for your great explaination of Turbo vs Procharger. and the "nuts& bolts" of them

[@richardholdener1727]

Glad to help

[@Hughie302]

As someone who is new to all of this and trying to learn as I go I found this to be an awesome video so I hit the subscribe button. Thanks for the content.

[@richardholdener1727]

welcome aboard

[@kevinwest3689]

WOW! Thanks Richard, if you've ever hurd the term All Hat No Cattle. Every time I watch one your videos I feel like I went to the stockyards & got another cow, Now if I only had the budget to take advantage of it. One of these days 🤞

[@unclesquirrel6951]

Personally I blame squirrels

[@yoboijd4175]

Me too unclearsquirrel, me too

[@timothybayliss6680]

That 21psi boost curve is nuts for analog control. That's also pretty good response for two pretty big turbos on a pretty small engine.

[@richardholdener1727]

the big bang motors were a stroke of luck

[@Kincentc]

A dyno's artificial load will make it look that way. On the street, the rpm climbs much faster, and the procharger will follow the rpm, when the turbo has a *small* amount of lag. Don't get fooled

[@timothybayliss6680]

@@Kincentc ya, the procharger does basically the same thing on the dyno as on the track. Really high end tuning shops have started.using hub dynos where they can program in the wheel speed against time and take cars from staging to the big end. It lets guys set up things like a transbrake and boost v speed and boost v gear. On the street once those turbos light i dont think the procharger would touch it. The advantage is too big and these turbos were selected to limit low end boost.

[@brianhoffman5414]

@@timothybayliss6680 I think they would too especially on that setup

[@383c10]

This is exactly really good to know if you want to make as much HP as possible on low boost.

[@jasonbyassee7541]

I’ve only had one boosted car, and that was an ‘86 svo. I knew the dealer back then and he had the wastegate adjusted to 18 psi. That was one quick fox body. In stock trim it has basically the same hp rating as the GT, but only 240 torque. The 5.5 extra lbs of boost made a huge difference. That torque would really set ya back in the seat.

[@michaelprice3912]

I agree with the tour problem I have a Focus RS turbo charged factory. I also have a for a Mustang with Paxton Nove 2000. I love the traction of this centrifugal supercharger, much better turbos kick in 10 to yank the car around Paxton is smooth and steady and nice power control

[@donbrutcher4501]

Bigger Procharger spinning faster to match the airflow capabilities of the turbos and then control the boost with electronic wastegate controllers same as is done with the turbos. Create whatever torque curve you want.

[@richardholdener1727]

YOU CAN'T SPIN THE BLOWER INDEFINITELY, AND IT'S BAD FOR THE BLOWER LIFE-BUT IT IS POSSIBLE

[@matthewmiddleton2234]

@@richardholdener1727 What if you had small enough exhaust housings to be quick-spooling, massive wastegates to prevent too much backpressure & a system to control the turbo based on turbo shaft rpm? What would that do?

[@Joshie2256]

@@matthewmiddleton2234 Small turbine housings waste a ton of energy through the wastegates and don't make the same power as a larger turbine housing. The closest to what you want to achieve is compound turbos as the little one gets bypassed as the big turbo comes in. Variable geometry turbines are also good, but limit the low RPM boost due to compressor surge.

[@matthewmiddleton2234]

@@Joshie2256 Joshua, long story short, I first envisioned this in a compound turbo setup

[@joeyoung4309]

So just dump pressurized air you spent alot of effort making to atmosphere?

[@speedlife301]

It all depends on the build , how the parts are speced and weight of the car and set up. I run a 416 with a Ysi race centrifugal blower and it’s not laggy at at. Power comes in at 2500 but I don’t see it because my stall flashes to 3500 rpm where my cam and blower all start to really come on . Proper specing of parts and how they work together is more important than just trying to make the most power. I’ve dog walked plenty of turbo 5.0, Camaros , gtr’s and civics most making more power than me because the 416 on motor makes plenty of tq to move the car and once the boost comes in it’s like nitrous that carries to 7500 rpm with a flat tq curves. I make almost equal tq to hp which is only seen in roots and turbo cars . Turbos are nice but I like my instant power , no lag , low heat , easy set up , easy to hook up but violent power delivery , predictable non on off switch power delivery and outside of you wanting to make promod power they can make just as must as turbos and on the same psi I make just as much power as some twin turbo cars but I think the Intake and cid heads play a big part in the efficiency.

[@richardholdener1727]

a centrifugal supercharger will always provide a rising boost curve-no combination changes that fact

[@speedlife301]

@@richardholdener1727 I’m not debating that I’m saying you can shift the curve to the left and have it come in early with pullies and a nice converter. Plus the power comes in hard but very traction friendly. I’ve had a Maggie and a lt4 blower and the race centrifugal on a vette is a better combo. You don’t need max tq at idle on a light vette that can bust the tires loose on motor alone. The power comes in hard and doesn’t stop where it matters in the mid and topend .

[@Dudeman9339]

The one that works best depends on your situation. If all you want is to make power and spare no expense then a turbo is for you. If you want to have a linear power band without sacrificing exhaust tone but dont mind that it doesnt nearly blow your engine up at max boost then a procharger is for you (I may be biased)

[@sethhughes2163]

Brother I feel your pains... lol ! The old adage applies " you can't please all of the people ~ all of the time... lol. KUDO'S for bringing the masses together... ( or minions... lol ) and trying to explain what some minds have trouble doing... that is accepting the facts. Thanks for a job well done! Respectfully, Seth

[@sethhughes2163]

You hit it on the head my friend! It would have made sense only to those who are NOT looking at the big numbers! KUDO'S again!

[@ryanrevis827]

Seems like the pro charger is a much simpler set up with less tuning needed. It also seems like it would put less stress on the system overall, the variable curve vs the more straight line output would be easier on the whole system. Plus there’s your transmission and gearing options that could make a big difference.

[@richardholdener1727]

both need the same amount of tuning, and the blower puts more stress on the crank snout, but both work well

[@eb5151]

I love these comparisons with detailed explanations. I have a book you wrote about building sbf motors with supercharger/combos " dyno proven 5.0 " from 2000. Still read through it when I'm in the garage!!

[@gallupcustomknives2293]

Love the 3d printed intake radius

[@GapSauceYoutube]

Sometime's the centrifugal powerband just feels faster, even if it isn't. And you keep your nice exhaust note!

[@CapnBubbaa]

Kinda like a 4 barrel vs 2x4 , is it always about horsepower...NO!!

[@GapSauceYoutube]

@@CapnBubbaa As long as it puts a smile on your face right!

[@nickhale117]

Man, I HATE how turbos change the Exhaust note.

[@yolofullsend]

Turbo helps me speed incognito..

[@GapSauceYoutube]

@Goes 2 Eleven Rising boost curve on a long pull giving the high rpm linear increase (placebo)where as turbo's tend to surge then hold in my experience. Like a turbo diesel but with more rpm 😅.

[@slickcasner4205]

On the centrifugal’s I run a way more aggressive pulley. But lower the RPMs. On this test if the pro charger would’ve produced 20 pounds of boost at 1000 RPMs lower the entire boost curve would’ve been much higher. Turbos are just very efficient. Centrifugals just work awesome. I use a NOVI 2200x in my low 9sec fully loaded full weight 5thGEN Camaro.

[@patrick11169]

like many things, forced induction is not a question of what works, its what works better, for that application at that time, the turbos are more efficient, but larger, heavier, more complex option, and of course expensive. so if packaging and weight, and budget, are the issue a procharger works just fine, if having not enough power is the problem then turbos and figure out how to make em work.

[@utahcountypicazospage5412]

The way procharger delivers power is perfect no drama

[@hotdog9262]

@@patrick11169 turbo are also more reliable, done right. and not necessarily more expensive or heavier

[@383c10]

2nd time watching video. I thought about it more. I agree turbos spinning that type of power would be very bad to drive in the street.

[@utahcountypicazospage5412]

I love Procharged vehicles faster then what the dyno shows power is linear no traction drama spinnin ain’t winnin hands down procharger for the street all day

[@Spad68]

It really depends on budget. Abbilty to do the job . Your engine you are building or already have . One robbs alot of hp from the pullies and rev much higher . The other has 2 turbo and runs much more efficient but cost more to build.

[@billygullifa3245]

Great job Richard

[@kristiangronberg3150]

I think a big thing is also the turbo lag and not so much nowadays with electronics throttle body's but still depending on tuning, the handling of the power. Let's say you're on the corner getting on the power, the car can handle 30% of the power @your rpm when the turbo is not making boots, now the turbo is "creating" on boots and you have even more power you need to trotle down, in a perfect world you need to lift the trotle just the right amount when the bost is coming oon to maintain the manifold vacuum constant, but it's really hard to doo, lift little too much and the turbo is stopping boost, don't lift enough and the turbo will make ewen more boost in till it reaches the gate pressure. A supercharger takes all this away, jeah you still might have a really small window to play with in in the pedal, but when you find it, it's there and are little more stable. You can find this even with small engines, small power outputs driving on ice or snow, it's like having 5x more power than you can put down even wit 100 to 200hp and then you have your turbo wanting to kill you in every corner ewen when na power is all too much. Don't get me wrong, it's a lot off fun, it's just impossible to run some kind of good time All the best and keep up the good work 👍

[@2lotusman851]

Hah! I feel for ya. I have two turbo cars. One is easy to drive off the corners with the power on, and one isn't. The one that is easy (3.5L V8) has 2 small, factory T25 turbos, and a rising rate throttle linkage. The boost control is electronic and has throttle position as one of its inputs. The hard car to drive (2.2L I4) has a single aftermarket hybrid T4 turbo, that is a bit laggier. The intake has individual butterflys for each runner, and has a direct non-rising rate linkage. The boost control has inputs for throttle position as well. -- I would say that having only enough turbo to get the job done is very important. A compressor map to select the turbo is a must. Get a wastegate controller that has throttle position programming available. This may be your lifesaver. Consider a rising rate throttle linkage. Certainly drive out of the corner with the turbo in mind, accounting for maybe a 1/2 to 1 second lag time. I have no advice for wet roads........since my cars are mid-engine and scare the shit out of me when they cut loose under power. Cheers 😜

[@cannonsharp8620]

I have an idea that might interest you, and you have knowledge that I could find useful when creating a prototype. If you’re willing I can put you on a designing committee when I start the business process I’d love feedback on how to develop it further. I’ll explain more if you let me know.

[@brianmathew09]

I dont have time to sit thru all this...but from having a turbo and racing many a procharged combos..the issue is getting ahold of the converter down low on the turbo is a beotch. Very difficult to 330 with the centrifugal stuff. Boost controllers are a missing link ..traction control too. I for one just dont have the ways and means for those or to be changing stators for each surface. Zero doubt the turbos have the power as seen in MPH. Also, theres a reason you see a huge jump to the blower cars at the track.

[@hotdog9262]

done right turbo is more reliable as there are few moving parts to make it happen

[@craigslue]

It would also seem that running a centrifugal would be more dependable more forgiving with less breakage and destruction.

[@brianmathew09]

maybe easier to tune..but dependable?? dont think so

[@craigslue]

@@brianmathew09 absolutely, turbos and other superchargers have much more torque down low which is going to cause less dependability and more breakage.

[@brianmathew09]

@@craigslue been running and tuning turbos for 20 years..been watching friends send their prochargers back to them time and time again..drew my conclusion from experience. The fact that prochargers 60 better than turbos should tell you something.

[@MichaelMassimino]

I'd like to see a cost analysis of twin turbo vs pro charger

[@ShawnGilbert1967]

Actually a smaller procharger, I run a -94 and it's very peaky...in fact there is something not discussed at all here, the -94 can drop 5-6 psi on the shift its so peaky... The M3SC marine I ran on my car come on boost and held it like a PD blower... For this test since he stopped at 6300 on the turbo or less and two of them... Might have been fun to see the twin torque storm curve their impeller comes on quicker... 2. A P1X or D1x turned near its max rated impeller speed would have drastically improved that soft hit on the -94s rising curve it would have been WAY closer...then dump out the peak in the same way you did with the turbos a waste gate, I have 2 Vbands in my charge pipe just for this...then you can also get a DS Delta and change tune ect ect for TC.... I get we are showing the difference but efficient twins vs a peaky -94 impeller running below its compressor map speed with that 4.25 pulley isn't a remotely close comparison... You can make a smaller p1x/d1x hit really hard spun to their max impeller speeds or you can do it with the -95 say in this test even a 3.85 pulley stopped at 6300 or with a waste gate would be a lot closer..... That said it looks like the -94 uses a little over 120hp to make 500 net...well that's actually great considering an F2 required a cog and would take 2.5x that... Ironically I run a F1A-94 with a BBC using a short stroke literally to do what he said let the chassis work a bit in the old 67 Camaro on a drag radial..... Interesting....thanks as usual

[@theozman38]

High end rpm of boost is salvageable. Drag racers do it all day. It’s called a scrambler. They just close the waste gate and blow off. To use the spare boost they otherwise would be blowing out.

[@yolofullsend]

Not quite.. scramble boost is a 2nd boost level setting, usually triggered by a button press.. yes it effects when the wastegates open/how much.. the bov always stays closed under boost regardless..

[@theozman38]

@@yolofullsend. Ok hey thanks for the info. I’m not promoting a channel but SRC racing talks on that scrambler, ya that button. Hold on!!! it could get crazy if pushed 😁😁.

[@Aaron-fj1hl]

for my street build a procharger is the way to go, plus CAMS. :)

[@Lockedinstreetracing]

That’s a real good test wonder if a f1x would had made much of a difference I mean I’m a turbo guy I’d never owned a procharger not that I wouldn’t but for the power levels and money it’s always gonna be turbos for me.

[@blow0me]

F1X would probably have broke.

[@evanarthur7535]

Twin turbos will spool up faster than a single turbo at the same cfm. And Procharger needs to develop a continuously variable transmission for the internal gear set.

[@richardholdener1727]

you can size a single to do the same thing as twins

[@evanarthur7535]

@@richardholdener1727 Single vs. twin would be a comparison I’d like to see.

[@edwardwood3622]

Procharger does have a CVT called the “i”.👍

[@evanarthur7535]

@@edwardwood3622 I’m not seeing that on the Procharger website. Do you have a part number? A variable vane compressor housing like the Ford Powerstroke diesels would be an interesting idea.

[@diamendking]

Turbos all the way!! . Too much power is a nice problem to have 🏁😉

[@marcojordan7430]

Turbo all the way

[@edwardbedford8233]

Great stuff! I know from a street perspective, on a sub 1000 HP application, turbo(s) look like the way to make big power at a lower boost level.

[@utahcountypicazospage5412]

Just depends how you want the car to act traction is also a factor

[@pettersaethre]

@@utahcountypicazospage5412 turbo is great with awd. rwd not so much

[@sstevocamaro]

Them turbos are efficient af!!

[@joeyoung4309]

Thats their biggest advantage, more effecient and dont take HP to run

[@mark_osborne]

The turbo is thermodynamic "magic", it extracts it's power from the wasted heat in the exhaust

[@yolofullsend]

No.. it spins due to gas flow.. hot gas has more volume. A hot turbo has tighter tolerances.. hense you can't hit a turbo with only a. Blow torch and make it spool.

[@michaelangelo8001]

Not really... Turbos are just more efficient than mechanically driven superchargers.

[@michaelallen2501]

He's not wrong. Just left out a few details. The thermal efficiency of a naturally aspirated engine is abysmally low. The vast majority of the BTU's of energy available in the fuel is wated as heat in the cooling system and the exhaust and the oil. A turbocharger uses one of those wasted forms of heat, which is energy, to increase power output of the engine. Thereby improving the thermal efficiency.

[@mark_osborne]

@@yolofullsend You need to study thermodynamics. It's a 3rd year mechanical engineering class, at least for me.

[@mark_osborne]

@@michaelallen2501 spot on

[@samsue1224]

Would be great to compare the two chargers on the same motor Yes extra work and money But it’s a much more useful experiment

[@richardholdener1727]

I have a number of direct comparisons between turbos and blower (on the Mod Ford I tested turbos, cent blower, roots blower & twin screw blower-all same boost AF and timing)

[@samsue1224]

Ok, I’ll have a look

[@sw20indy]

So it should also be feasible to run a rising boost curve with turbos and ECU/electronic wastegate control. Would be cool to see a turbo dyno graph at 10psi mid range and 21psi at the top

[@ReubenHorner]

You can do that. With some wastegate setups you can run 0psi of boost even. I tell you what having an engine with a flat torque curve is great fun. Makes you want to keep revving it out

[@richardholdener1727]

0 psi?

[@ReubenHorner]

@@richardholdener1727 yea mate, if you run an electric gate or CO2 powered one then you can have as much or as little boost as you'd like. Mix this with the wonders of modern ecus and you can make your power curve whatever you like

[@keefespencer1173]

Even in Street Outlaws NPK almost every single person in the top ten in points up to this point has a Hemi with a Procharger on it with the exception of a one big cubic inch nitrous engine and maybe a Hemi with a turbo or turbos on it and a 481x with a turbo or turbos on it

[@dakotaautosales9673]

There happens to be 3 nitrous cais nitrous cars in the top at NPK and they all went to the hemi pro charger because of the weight brake

[@im1469]

It would be awesome to see you do a video comparing the procharger I1 to various other options. The variable ratio drive is interesting to ponder.

[@davegrant3949]

ccg🪴🍄🍄

[@dylandesmond]

Change your gear pulley on your centrifugal to match the boost peak at the identical rpm. Then add a wastegate (or two) on the intake and an electric clutch on the centrifugal. Now the turbo is pointless. Better yet twin charge it have a bypass air tight throttlebody that is boost relay activated or a spring loaded sealed flap so you can spool up your bigger turbo quicker with the smaller 1000hp centrifugal. Then add nitrous.

[@richardholdener1727]

you can't change pulleys to get the centrifugal to make max boost at lower engine speeds. Only an electric motor can spin it up to max speed-complex and expensive-just get a turbo if you want what a turbo does.

[@stevefrankdatank1995]

Dyno as expected. Makes sense, procharger makes boost contingent on how hard the motor is working, which is why you made more boost revving it out 😂 twin turbo off the exhaust gases more instantaneous on the propellers, especially if one is set up to spool before the other making the power distribution even more unfair against a procharger lol. See, a procharger, theoretically would do well on a mild compression VTEC engine. Something that revs naturally high, can build more boost on the top end and give it a better chance at a higher peak/average as long as set up supports. Turbos have a limit, eventually there’ll be an insufficient amount of exhaust gas (at higher RPMs), but again, can easily be fought with a twin set up, having the second turbo spool later in the RPM range. Do you think maybe a single turbo would have been a more fair comparison? Who knows! Great video!

[@richardholdener1727]

a single turbo sized correctly does the same thing-centrifugal superchargers make boost relative to engine speed and na power output

[@magnum9987]

Richard, can you do a video comparing the boost and power curves of different boost control set ups? 3 port, 4 port, and 2x 3 port set ups etc.

[@richardholdener1727]

how you program them would make more of a difference

[@dsm4959]

I understand this is an older video. I just wanted to mention I’ve spoken with a few other serious engine builders racers who have used Turbos, PD Blowers and Centrifugal SCs. One guy ran many of the ProCharger Head units including the F1A, F1A94, F1D and actually to many to list. But he was quite knowledgeable with the PC format and Head units and how they performed and one thing I remember he saying was the F1A and F1A94 were a bit soft down lawn then really started to pull @ 4000RPM. He also mentioned the F1D was a very good low end under the curve performer and produced a Nice TQ Curve for a Centrifugal SC. If your able to get your hands on a F1D ProCharger it would be interesting to see how the power performs under the curve vs the F1A and F1A94 ?

[@richardholdener1727]

the comparison isn't between different sizes and impeller designs on a Procharger-but rather centrifugal design vs turbo. The amount of difference between different centrifugal blowers is minimal compared to the difference between a blower and turbo

[@dsm4959]

Agreed...

[@joshgessinger4509]

Like turbos but both r good just like the possibilities that turbos give u lol!! But on a budget build most HP for the money hard to beat a turbo setup. Specially the CX racing turbos get lot for ur money my opinion anyway. Great stuff as always Thanks u

[@-Jason-L]

It's weird to see so much supercharger bias in the comments lol. The turbo makes more power, everywhere. Traction management? Thats why turbos have electronic boost controllers - you can adjust boost across the rpm range.

[@gixxer750axld]

best explanation this far! Thanks man.

[@stlchucko]

For most people, they never see anywhere close to 1000hp; especially street driven cars. With those, octane of pump gas is one of the biggest limiting factors; especially when e85 isn’t common in their area. Depending on the engine, you may only be able to get 7-10 psi using pump gas (and still keep a decent amount of timing). My main point… This is where a turbo really shines; that it has less parasitic losses than a belt driven power adder (supercharger). At peak boost, it might take 50-100 hp to spin the supercharger (depending on the setup), while properly sized turbo will have considerably less…. Which means more power going to the tires. I’d like to see a direct A-B comparison. Like a junkyard 5.3, cam only (maybe something around 220 @ 0.050”, a Sloppy S2, or that 224 degree crane cam you use a lot), and make the boost around 10psi (match the turbo to whatever the supercharger does). Runs to the same RPM. I bet the turbo ends up making about 50 more peak HP.

[@michaelangelo8001]

Lol, Holdener says a turbo has *zero* parasitic loss...

[@blow0me]

If you can only get 7-10psi on pump and are knock limited, you're running crazy high CR which was a poor choice for a pump gas build, unless you only wanted 7-10psi.. Everything is a package. It's not difficult to run, 20, 30psi on pump fuel.

[@AdmiralRustyShackleford]

@@michaelangelo8001 Only after it spools. Off idle it produces backpressure, a restriction and the bigger the turbo the worse it gets, that's part of turbo lag.

[@stlchucko]

@@blow0me There is absolutely no way you're running 20-30 PSI on a stock compression LS engine (even the lowest compression ones, which are 9:1 or so) on 91/93 octane pump gas. The only way you can run 10+psi is with conservative timing and meth injection; and even then, you're not putting 20+psi.

[@stlchucko]

@@michaelangelo8001 On an optimized system, there's virtually "no" parasitic loss.... But many systems aren't perfectly optimized. It's easier to measure how much losses will be on particular supercharger at a certain boost level. Parasitic losses from a turbo is dependent on each individual combination.

[@g.pelayo9266]

You should do an episode on compound boosting

[@kristiangronberg3150]

He did some compound tests, but you I wuld really love to see a come back on that. I guess the stock stuff wuld not last too long though with a lot off low end boost. I think he can run as much boost as possible with a normal setup with sensors being the limiting factor.

[@richardholdener1727]

ALREADY UP-PLEASE SEARCH

[@2O6Team]

@@richardholdener1727 Hey richard, I know you covered compound boost with regards to a Roots and Twin Screw style setup in conjunction with a Turbo setup, but my question is would results be similar with using a Centrifugal blower combined with a Turbo? Or is this not a good setup to run with and why? thanks again and been a happy subscriber of your channel

[@2O6Team]

My concern would be there would be too much Boost at high RPMs but obviously if your Fuel System and Engine is rated to handle it, in theory it would be okay and sustainable? and what about intercooler plumbing for a Centri+Turbo

[@earache_srt8790]

< so I should start planning on pro-charging the 392 Hemi in my single cab 2005 Ram????

[@cobramike13bravo63]

Enjoy all your videos, but any news on the project Nova?

[@bogusphone8000]

Show the pulls from idle. How much time is any engine spending at that point in the rev range?

[@yurimodin7333]

from what I understand most/all dynos can't do that very well.

[@bogusphone8000]

@@yurimodin7333 The common use for superchargers and blowers is lower in the RPM band. While turbos are spooling, a properly sized supercharger is building off idle. Turbos always win on the top side as the exhaust gases continue to excelerate.

[@mxguy2438]

Despite dyno limitations, pulls from idle dont make sense in the real world. If you have an automatic, its going to downshift and the converter is going to flash to stall speed. If you have a manual and youre making pulls from idle in high gear... You probably don't like your motor very much.

[@richardholdener1727]

WOT AT IDLE?

[@Fk8td]

@@richardholdener1727 that’s what I said lol. Who goes wot at idle? The lowest I ever started wot was 2500 and that was for street tuning purposes.

[@dcarden3031]

I know a turbo guy running 8.80s and a prochargerd guy running 7.84 with same set up Same car.

[@jasonbailey8960]

Let's see twin supercharger vs single turbo on the same motor 👍

[@dwej9080]

This was two turbos vs one Procharger?

[@richardholdener1727]

THINK FLOW & POWER RATE AND NOT NUMBER OF BLOWERS/TURBOS

[@earl8590]

Great vid! Learned alot, +1 sub🔥

[@carlspackler9550]

Looking at cams for my Project SLEEPRRRRR F100 and ran across these 4 Pattern Cams... I would love to see a test with those if possible. the theory behind it sounds great but I want to see dyno test.

[@richardholdener1727]

WESTECH HAS TESTED THEM

[@randywiddis]

The procharger curve seems more manageable.

[@davevan9150]

Have you done boost curves of different sized turbos? I'd like to see that.

[@b.c4066]

Be next to impossible compile any meaningful data because the curves would be different depending on what engine, how the engine is built if I'm not mistaken. That's why good manufacturers will provide efficiency maps for their turbos

[@andivatar6383]

i guess it'll be very dependent on the ignition timing curve and camshaft profile. but yea it'll be interesting

[@richardholdener1727]

THE WASTE GATE CONTROLS THAT TIL THEY RUN OUT OF FLOW-THEN BOOST FALLS

[@10manycars]

Possibly a dumb question, but if the supercharger is appropriately sized to make close to max boost around 4000 RPM. Could you not then just bleed off the excess pressure with a waste gate to make a boost curve similar to this turbo set up?

[@richardholdener1727]

very difficult to get the cent blower to make max boost at just 4000 rpm

[@scottmijin9463]

Looks like I’m better of going turbo since I make more power faster and quicker compared to a centrifugal supercharger, and at lower boost levels

[@brianmathew09]

way to many variable for that to be true in all cases and combo's ..have to see the number of PC combos in the winner circles..much easier to get ahold of a supercharger in the 330

[@texasstreettunes1310]

Ive used nitrous, centrifugal sc and turbo. funnest one by far was the turbo also it was very very cheap i made a kit for 1k not as cheap as nitrous but it was annoying to fill.

[@fullmetalmars8571]

Appreciate the breakdown

[@brianhoffman5414]

Great video thank you rich

[@keefespencer1173]

Next video should be either Single v. Twin v. Compound or Procharger v. Compound

[@albertfarias9120]

AWESOME CONTENT FOR LEARNING KEEP UP THE GREAT WORK HONOLULU COMMUNITY IS WATCHING BIG AL HONOLULU HAWAII MANOA VALLEY

[@richardholdener1727]

YES-BIG ISLAND-WE WERE IN OAHU THIS SUMMER

[@kendrickwilliams3696]

Nice!! Great feedback

[@dsm4959]

Although I know some of the slightly smaller ProCharger head units only make @1000HP. Since the F1A PC has a different gear ratio in it and takes more to spin compared to other PC Units, Do you believe the Power Curves May be different with a different Head Unit with smaller gearing? Thanks great content, as always....

[@richardholdener1727]

Every centrifugal I have even tested has displayed this rising boost curve-very little boost down low-then max at max rpm

[@markrich3271]

Cfm / lbs min and manifold density is what we all should be comparing, boost numbers are only good for that exact engines owner for testing .

[@fredfranklin1965]

If you put twin pro chargers on it .I think it would be a better comparison. Carroll Shelby put twin paxton's on the super cobra sack in the day.

[@aaronliddell4280]

I disagree, if the single head unit is sufficiently sized for the power goals, it’ll definitely make more power than twin blowers creating twice the drag to meet same power goal.

[@KreatorOfDeath1985]

The curve would look exactly the same as one procharger. It's still same boost per RPM. You could add 20 it would be the same.

[@richardholdener1727]

if you add a 2nd blower-the airflow doubles (boost goes way up)

[@srtjay8862]

Thank you sir which would you recommend for my 2012 jeep srt8

[@scottleggejr]

I wonder what a CVT (transmission) on the blower input shaft would do where it would spin the impeller faster at lower engine RPM and slow input as the engine speed increases. How would it compare to VGT turbos?

[@RyanMcIntyre]

What about hybrid drive, the engine turns a generator that powers a cell that powers an electric drive.

[@mxguy2438]

Procharger makes one.. "I" force or something.

[@RyanMcIntyre]

Kind of hard to beat a turbo though, look at those boost curves, plus there's no parasitic loss.

[@d-phoenix2198]

@@RyanMcIntyre Parasitic loss on Turbos definitely exists (remember, the engine can't exhale as efficiently) it is just less than a mechanical one.

[@chipcurrey653]

Prochargers are so good that no mass produced car has used one

[@richmond4471]

Not so...

[@skimowhite586]

How about ad one turbo with supercharger and then twin turbo comparison

[@richardholdener1727]

compound on both? Not necessary on most V8s

[@maxhorner2409]

What I gather from this is if I am puttin this in a pickup the procharger is better because it builds more power down low vs the turbos which need to be at 4000 to pass the procharger. Correct?

[@richardholdener1727]

the turbo was better everywhere

[@danacook9615]

So, as a tuner, can you tell me for the horsepower gains which one gives the most power per specific fuel consumption? I know that they both have parasitic power draws and it seems to me that the supercharger seems way less complicated and has the most linear power curve. What are you thoughts on dollar per hp gain? Great video and thank you.

[@richardholdener1727]

turbo wins for power and fuel consumption, though people don't care about how much fuel they use under boost

[@HorizonPaintingHawaiiLLC]

Curious on the fuel consumption. Turbo should use less fuel no?

[@richardholdener1727]

yes

[@SasnarDash]

What would you do with a 6th gen camaro manual?

[@AtticAZ]

Great video!

[@billygullifa3245]

Richard elx Richard excellent job

[@Kovemaster_69]

Ima run procharger on my 69. I love the turbo cars I have but procharger just power where I need it for the price

[@FigQc]

The thing that I’m wondering is how they works different when they look the same

[@yousef.al-assaf]

It's mainly about where they go in the setup; mounted on the engine (SC) or exhaust-dependent (turbo)

[@racingjoe27]

Do you have EGT or fuel consumption figures from these tests? I’d like to see the torque when the F1 is making 21 pounds at 6300 RPM

[@richardholdener1727]

no EGT or bsfc numbers-I never ran 21 psi

[@Techangler65]

Richard thanks for the great video’s. Question I have a 2014 Silverado with the L86 6.2. Would you recommend say a Magnuson 2650 or turbos ? This is a pleasure so not worried about towing

[@richardholdener1727]

either will make a big difference in power

[@monakhirat8527]

can i have it both?

[@99alexisagc]

Are you going to the good guys show in Pleasanton?

[@timothybayliss6680]

Right on

[@LMach1]

I'm lookign to put a procharger on my 5.0 with a 1st gear ratio of 3.66. What benefits from a turbo would I see over the procharger? I'm not looking to kill myself, but get a little extra off the line power. I like my car exaust loud too, as I've heard turbos take away from that (not sure how much though).

[@richardholdener1727]

neither of those choices (turbo or procharger) offer immediate, off-the-line boost response. A PD blower is better at that, but a turbo makes more hp per psi than either once it spools

[@baby-sharkgto4902]

All the power under 6000 (example RPM) is impressive but irrelevant when racing as you are never under 6000 RPM. When racing you shift between 6500 and 7000 (example). And the RPMs only drop a few hundred from one gear to the next.

[@richardholdener1727]

A FEW HUNDRED-NOT IN ANY FACTORY TRANS, RIGHT?

[@baby-sharkgto4902]

@@richardholdener1727 I CAN'T TELL IF YOU'RE KIDDING OR NOT. WATCH THE TACHOMETER AS THE GEARS CHANGE.

[@RTRacing87]

Richard have you done any videos boosting higher compression engines like over 11:1? What tips can you give for boosting an 11:1 ls7?

[@joeyoung4309]

If its gonna be a street car youll need to drop the compression or just accept you cant run much boost on 93 and if you want to turn it up youll need some higher octane "race fuels"

[@chrisbergeron5399]

I have 11:1 brand new build i bought in a deal. Wanted a twin turbo or procharger but engine was built to spray. Billy the kid is 13:1 twin turbo, why have people said I need to drop compression to do so? Richard says I have less margin for error, is it that bad? Billy is pushing 30-35 psi at it and I know my motor is on par with his if not better. Forged Ls 408

[@RTRacing87]

I think most people assume it’s gonna be a daily driver type vehicle running on pump gas. Better fuel, less timing is gonna be the biggest deal from my research.

[@JETZcorp]

As a kid, I grew up playing with 2-strokes. In my mind, the proper way for an engine to behave is quite soft on the bottom, then building and building all the way to almost redline. Unbelievable lightning-fast throttle response. If there's a sudden jump somewhere in the middle, that's not abnormal, but not preferable either (old Maicos and rotary-valve Kawasakis built power very smoothly). I have yet to find any car that scratches that itch. Frankly, even a 600 sport bike makes a disappointingly flat and fat torque curve to my tastes, though perhaps some nasty cams on an R6 might get there. Anyway, my point is, I'm liking this centrifugal supercharger business. That continuous build of boost may be the cure to the 4-stroke engine's diesel-like nature. The turbos? Nah, save that torque curve for the semi trucks. Last thing I want is a donkey-kick of torque coming in some time after I've asked for it. Maybe if I was into drag racing with an automatic... but I'm not.

[@richardholdener1727]

you like what you like, but this isn't the 1980s turbo situation any more

[@JETZcorp]

@richardholdener1727 I'm going from experiences with OE turbo applications from the last ~15 years. Audi 2.0T, Ecoboost Fords, stuff like that. Sure, you're not waiting whole seconds anymore, but it's still a comparatively "mushy" response. If you can tolerate a torque converter or GM's drive-by-wire, then modern amounts of turbo lag are no biggie at all. I'm just trying to find a car that has that special sauce that you get in a YZ250 or something, without having to look at an RX-8 in the driveway.

[@scottythebody0811]

Great video. How would a twin screw or roots compare to turbos?

[@richardholdener1727]

only in response but not in power per psi

[@adamhodgeson9812]

Hi Richard, love your videos mate. Just a question, wondered if you could should a quick section of the actual dyno runs (video) that you use in your comparisons? Would be great to see, cheers Clint.

[@richardholdener1727]

LOTS OF THESE EARLY TESTS HAD NO VIDEO

[@ronnieraines3975]

Would the difference have been the same with a single turbo😮???

[@richardholdener1727]

a single or twin make the same power if sized properly

[@ronnieraines3975]

Love your videos, would the curve come in later with a larger single turbo?