Just twin charge it ( supercharger and turbo) and live with boost through the whole rev range.

I was more so after an answer, I'm not asking which I should use, I know which I will use, it's more a general question for the myth of wasted/free energy from exhaust... Thanks for your input anyways, though I don't think twin charge would be an easy job for someone stating they learned about cars online and still have minimal hands on experience, but still thanks...

Matt

Theoretically id belive turbos would be more efficent by design however its based upon the units intended purpose.
Superchargers are typically for low down torque and go where turbos are based on the exhaust and copressor housing sizes.
Small compressor housing low rpm boost but restrictive and generates too much heat larger exhaust housing less restriction but lagier due to rpms needed to get the exhaust gases flowing to spool the impeller.
Either way theres a compromise so theoretically its a waste of effprt working out which one unless every tenth of a second counts racing.

In a road or ocassional track car wont make much difference as road needs torque to get to 100kmh. Any more is a waste by design for law abiding citizens

Cheers again for reply, I understand the difference between the two but, have you heard of anyone saying that turbo is using wasted free energy from the exhaust? Sorry if I sound confusing or I am not asking directly what I really mean, that tends to be my life story, confusing people... But do you understand what I am asking?

Yes the turbo converts the wasted energy from the exhsist. Exhaust gas flow to spin the compressor turbine that spins the shaft spining the compressor turbine forcing more compressed air into the motor under boost.
So the more accurate way to describe it would be in a turbo situation, the exhaust gas us used to spin the turbo where in supercharged or na situations it would just fliw out the tail pipe doing nothing.

But its not free power there is always a compromise. Weight heat associated accesories to run what ever desired set up you choose. Piping intercoolers etc etc.

Cool ok see that's what I mean, for example if you had an engine set up with an exhaust going into a turbo, and had that turbo's engine compressing air into 'a slow leak air chamber' at say 5 psi for the heck of an example, the engine would still have to 'push' the turbine blades of the exhaust side in order to compress air on the intake side into that chamber. So this means that the engine has to 'push' and that is a restriction of flow, meaning it wasn't just free energy because the cylinders had to use a bit of energy to 'push' the air out of the combust chamber and through the headers into the exhaust turbine with enough power to compress air on the other side. I just drew up some pictures in paint if no one gets what I mean???

1 sec

See in this picture the engine would have to work to compress that chamber

Attach file:

---

  Turbo pictures.png (30.33 KB)

And then as you see in this picture the engine would still have to 'push' (which uses energy, so it's not free wasted energy cause the source of energy comes from the cylinder pushing the air out which that power is originally taken from combustion) the exhaust gas through the turbine to make compression on the other side.





I'm sorry if this is annoying to anyone, I'm just a 20 year old kid trying to get my head around a few things, and this never made sense when people said that it's 'wasted energy', it doesn't seem like it is wasted energy as the source goes back to the combustion for power, obviously...??







Am I missing something??????????????

Attach file:

---

  Turbo picture 2.png (29.82 KB)

You're looking at it wrong.
It isn't the flowof the exhuast gases that spins the turbo. When an engine expels the spend gases, the combustion event can be only milliseconds ago. The (very hot) gasses which are exiting the engine and passing through the turbo are still expanding. So it is more the residual thermal expansion energy of the gasses which the turbo is recycling, rather than the exhaust gas flow. I refer to this energy as residualas the initial thermal expansion at the point of combustion is what pushes the piston down the bore to make the engine run in the first place.

The turbo is more efficient because it harnesses the otherwise wasted energy. (VS the belt driver blower's parasitic losses to drive)
The difference is that with their being no lag, the supercharger has the scope to generate substantial bottom end torque.

Horsepower sells cars,
TORQUE wins races.

Most folk here know all too well which camp I'm in.