Supercharged Turbocharged?

[Hooligans]

Why does there need to be an intercooler if it is supercharged, it must be turbocharged as well? Why?

http://jpx.responsejp.com/jpx/images/2004/04/02/59155_1.jpg?fit=normal

 

[[email protected]]

Intercooler not needed but recommend. Superchargers and turbos are 2 different device to cram more intake charge in the cylinder .

Superchargers are driven by belt or gears.

Turbos are driven by the exhaust.

Both devices h eat the intake charge when it compresses it.

An intercooler is basically a radiator to cool the compressed intake charge.


Sent from my SM-G900V using Tapatalk

 

[Hooligans]

I fully understand the function of a supercharger and of a turbocharger but thanks for the explanation. My question was, is the bike pictured both supercharged and turbocharged? Like the mad max bike: http://www.madmax.com/ and if so what is the benefit? Couldn't you just increase boost of one or the other? Which one feeds into the other, or do they both somehow feed into the carbs/throttle bodies simultaneously? What if one blows stronger than the other - is there back pressure? Why is this necessary?

 

[chainednitromaxx]

The reason it helps to have a intercooler on either is that you pick up heat from compressing air. (Superheated) the intercooler of course takes the superheated heat out. The less heat less chance for detonation. I would imagine a turbo driven by exhaust has very minimal additional heat added compared to a centrifugal supercharger driven by belt. As far as why would a bike have both as the mad max bike I am assuming I have seen ?? Makes no sense at all to me. Waisted energy. That bike would run just as good with only one. If he wanted two sorces it would have been better to use NOS with the boost source. A small 20 shot would cool charge and add any more oxygen he was wanting. I also have a hard time believing the claimed weight of that bike. Just my thoughts. Cool looking bike however

 

[chainednitromaxx]

486 LB. ???!!!! And also added weight of turbo and supercharger and a 2.5 lb bottle of nos. pondering. Wonder why we still to date have not
Seen any performance on 1:8 or 1/4 mile times ? Or has anyone heard of times it ran ??

 

[carrizog60]

i think usually the supercharger feds the turbo,helping it to spool sooner.
both devices on a bike are overkill as i only can think of it on a build that needs lots off boost and needs a big turbo to do it.
but with big turbos comes lag and the supercharger helps with that,delivering boost sooner.
on my opinion?that one is for show.

 

[one2dmax]

It's purely for looks in this case.

 

[Itgoes]

486 LB. ???!!!! And also added weight of turbo and supercharger and a 2.5 lb bottle of nos. pondering. Wonder why we still to date have not
Seen any performance on 1:8 or 1/4 mile times ? Or has anyone heard of times it ran ??

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

It's purely for looks in this case.

For display purposes only!

 

[chainednitromaxx]

I agree one2dmax.

 

[Fire-medic]

Arlen Ness builds some stuff like that, two power-adders, more for the show circuit than anything you would be riding on the street. Like the double-GMC blowers, it's the epitome of Ed "Big Daddy" Roth's drawings of the Rat Fink cars, a huge engine in a tiny chassis, w/a shifter 'way-above the seat, piloted by a bloodshot-eyed creature with needle-teeth, getting ready to grab another gear, the chassis torqued into a near-pretzel, heading down the road. Ma and Pa, beware!

I recall at Tom Monahagn's (Domino's Pizza) car museum outside Ann Arbor MI , he had a 'slingshot dragster' bearing two 6-71 GMC superchargers, stacked one-atop the other, and an impossibly narrowed rear end. I doubt it ever ran, but it sure looked cool behind the velvet rope or whatever they had to separate the cars from the paying public. I have a Kodak film shot of that in my inventory.