[GoldieAlek]

Sup fellas !
i have 97 2.2 CL 5spd which is same thing as 97 Accord EX
onnesly i m just looking into these 2 things
what are segestions what is better for daily driving ......... i m looking for more power but i m not gonna downstrip my car and drag race it . I just want it to be qicker.
and what kid on $$$ i m looking at ?
Any opinoin would help !
Thanks

 

[munkeysoup]

the supercharger would be more reliable for daily driving, but the turbo has more potential to make power. im not sure if they make a supercharger for your car, but they probably do. but if i were you i would still go w/ turbo.

 

[mike6024]

if you aren't a mechanic, and only want it for daily driving then i go with a supercharger. You won't have the "turbo lag" then, and i've just heard about way too many problems people have had with aftermarket turbos.

 

[F23A4]

They're both pretty much correct, though turbo lag is an overplayed issue. For daily driving (mainly street driving), the SC is much more practical than the turbo as its power delivery is instantaneous. If you do alot of hwy driving, you might prefer the turbo as it pulls harder (than the SC) at midrange and topend, AND is more tuneable.

However, this Turbo vs. SC debate is a moot point when it comes to Accords as there is no SC avail for the F-series Honda motors; just Turbo kits. If there were such SC kits, I would have purchased it by now.

f23a4

 

[2JZBoost]

I woud go supercharger because they are more reliable, and they provide max boost from very low rp 's compared to turbo's which gives you more torque...good for daily city driving. A typical kit would probably run around $1500-$2500 depending on type of supercharger. I really don't know about labor though.

 

[munkeysoup]

I woud go supercharger because they are more reliable, and they provide max boost from very low rp 's compared to turbo's which gives you more torque...good for daily city driving. A typical kit would probably run around $1500-$2500 depending on type of supercharger. I really don't know about labor though.

but like f23a4 said, there isnt a sc kit out for the f-series engine.

 

[PAC-MAN]

i like the idea of a turbo CL. it'd be different and a big sleeper too.

 

[gob_2k]

I don't know. From what I have read, superchargers are really bad on your engine when you push them hard. But keep them at a safe boost and superchargers are good. I guess the same goes for turbos though. I drove the turbo beetle today. damn, its pretty quick. Lates

 

[GoldieAlek]

i like the idea of a turbo CL. it'd be different and a big sleeper too.

yeah thats kinda what i was looking wor ............. there are some CL's with turbo and Nos <-----i really dont want that stuff.
But yeah it would be deffenetly different.

 

[GoldieAlek]

They're both pretty much correct, though turbo lag is an overplayed issue. For daily driving (mainly street driving), the SC is much more practical than the turbo as its power delivery is instantaneous. If you do alot of hwy driving, you might prefer the turbo as it pulls harder (than the SC) at midrange and topend, AND is more tuneable.

However, this Turbo vs. SC debate is a moot point when it comes to Accords as there is no SC avail for the F-series Honda motors; just Turbo kits. If there were such SC kits, I would have purchased it by now.

f23a4

Thanks a lot man ! Well overall i really dissapoint to find out that they dont make one for ride !