Another idiot post.

Jamsport build 300bhp engines with a supercharger using standard internals and compression. When companies achieve the same result with a turbo they need to lower the compression with new pistons.

How come? Why can't a turbo engine achieve the same power without lowering the compression given that they are both forms of forced induction?

 

Its because Jamsport use Rotrex chargers which give a linear boost plot and power graph

 

So because you don't get a sudden dump of boost it's not as stressful for the internals?

 

They do ? Since when ?

 

The days of low compression Turbo engines should be gone its not required. My compression was raised from standard even when running 2.9bar.

 

engine management and better manufcturing means compression ratios can be higher than in the good old days as environments can be changed more accurately.
i run an 8.5:1 on my zetec turbo and plan to get the boost up to 2BAR as soon as i sort a clutch to hold that.

 

All depends on the engine and where the boost is made

 

Superchargers are generally used at lower boost, Jamsport quote 11psi for thiers.

I'm not a Turbo person but I rarely see people talking of Turbo boost so low, it's usually wind it up and wait for the POP.

.

 

yeah well it just made me think. If Jamsport build a turbocharged Duratec it's specced with low comp pistons. The supercharger version isn't so I just wondered how come if both conversions produce a similar base line of power lol.

I get these random questions to ask all the time n have to post on here when my dad is sick of me nagging lol.

 

Like turbo's, it all depends on engine spec. There are plenty of high boost charger conversions out there

The rotrex chargers Jamsport use are centrifugal superchargers which increases airflow (and boost) as the revs rise whereas turbo's hit there max boost as soon as they can. I suggest you read Stu's technical articles which may (?) have sections on chargers