why do you guy's like a turbo vs a centrif Supcharger?

mormanman said
It depends on what your looking for. Me and my brother have had this conversation millions of times. If you want almost instant power you want a supercharger. If you want more efficient power you want a turbo.
IMHO, I would go with both. Twin charging. I know someone said why do that, well if you have ever used an oxy fuel torch, its the same concept. You can turn up the fuel and have an inefficient flame or can turn the oxygen up too high and the flame goes away or you can get the right mixture and have raw, efficient, "heat."
With twin charging you get the benefits of both, you get the efficient-ness of a turbo and the almost instant power of a super.
Also, a lot of folks think that a turbo in built for the motor, I don't think this is true. You can take a turbo for a TD and slap it on a 340 and it will blow up unless you build it right and you can bluild all your plumbing.
Correct me if i'm wrong, please

turbos and plumbing don't blow up motors tunes do. even a castrophic failure of wheels(rarely happens on MOST applications) IF the car is intercooled will have very little to almost no ingestion of parts. the bearings in the turbo IF they chewed out would be picked up by the oil filter. i have seen more motor failures destroy a turbo than turbo failures destroy an engine. BOOST with out enough fuel that is another story been there done that.

an engine without forged internals or beefier pieces will take it IF there is enough fuel and boost is not out of sight.

i currently have chryslers weakest turbo motor running 20 psi and it had 100k on it when i turned up the wick. it now has at least 165k on it. it is nothing special in the lower end cast piston,cast crank,cast lightweight rods but it has plenty of fuel i run and egt and wideband to monitor what is happening as well as read the plugs . basics help keep things together as well as paying attention to what you are doing.

Norm