Oil changes are recommended about every 1500 miles, whereas the supercharger can stay with the 3000 mile oil change. But superchargers do require belt inspections to ensure that they are not cracked or worn and could possibly break.
If you go to my website, I have alot of info on turbo's, positive displacement blowers and centrifugal superchargers. Hopefully you get an idea out of that.
Any questions or comments, please email me at the link on the website.
Roots style superchargers and turbos are completely different animals..Comparison is like apples to oranges..
But, as far as maintenance, turbos usually need rebuilding after 45k miles of use, depending on the severity of conditions..
Roots style superchargers I've seen go upwards of 100k miles with no maintenance necessary except for changing the blower oil in the case (this I recommend at least every 40k miles)..It is self-contained, so does not see the same "harshness" of a turbo..
As far as power, again, completely different kind of power-makers..depends on what you are looking for..
Roots blowers, i.e. positive displacment, hit max boost almost off idle and provide it all the way to redline. The roots blower does provide a set amount of air per rotation of the blower lobes which is why it is called positive displacement. The JRSC is a positive displament blower. But roots are the most power robbing and least adiabatic efficient.
Centrifugal Superchargers are the exact same as a turbocharger except that in place of the exhaust housing, there is driveshaft housing which connects to your accessory belt system. They provide boost like turbo's, most of it at the top of the rpm range. At lower rpm, almost no boost is present. But centrifugals are the most adiabatic efficient
For example, RippMods makes a centrifugal supercharger system for 2000+ eclipses bith V6 and I4. On the I4, with an 11 psi pulley, the engine will hit 6 psi at 4100 rpm and 11 by 5500 rpm with a 6000 rpm redline.
Turbochargers are the most versatile FI system out right now. With a properly sized turbo max boost is easily attainable below 3500 rpm, with boost being created as early as 1100 rpm. That gives you almost the entire rpm range to have boost. There is a turbo kit out now for the I4 eclipse which does hit max boost of 8.5 psi around 2900rpm with a dyno of 265whp.
Just to be on the safe side. Not to say that cybernation is wrong, of course. Think of it this way. You run regular 10W-30 synthetic prior to running boost. Then you add a turbo system and your underhood temps increase dramatically. Now that same 10W-30 oil is getting heated to between 500 and 900 degrees going thru the turbo, whereas on an NA engine, the hottest it may get is 230 degrees. The oil breaks down much quicker due to the heat.
1500 is kinda a guideline, but what the turbo manufacturer reccomends is what you should do. Cybernation knows their kit better than I do.
Most companies that offer FI kits also offer staged upgrades. For the 3rd Gen eclipse, RippMods has put togther a stage 1 and stage 2 kit. Stage 1 runs 11psi and nets 290whp and stage 2 is 15 psi and nets around 350whp. They also offer Stage 1 and 2 for the V6 Eclipse too.
I am fairly new to the RSX, it's potential and aftermarket support, but am learning quickly.
Supercharger = better gas mileage, less wear, less maintenance, average performance boost.
Turbocharger = bad gas mileage, huge wear, TONS of maintenance, amazing performance.
If this is your daily driver then Supercharger is the best way to go. Turbocharger is not 'more efficient' because it uses exhaust gases. The supercharger uses wasted rotational power from the crank. Supercharge is instant power whenever you need it, turbocharger has lag because the thing has to spin up first. There are 500whp turbocharged RSXes, but that's crazy and not even street legal. It would require more maintenance than something ... that requires a lot of maintenance. Turbo ends up being more expensive in the end thanks to more frequent oil changes and required extras like engine internals and rebuilds and maintenace.
You are kinda right. Both power adders require more fuel, and therefore you will get worse gas mileage.
turbocharging performance is all in how the system is designed. There are turbo kits for the RSX which only put out 85 more HP because that is what they were designed for, and how well the engine takes boost. the turbo kit for the 2000+ eclipse 4 cyl. puts out an extra 150whp because the engine takes boost very well and that is what the kit is designed to so. The only extra wear that turbochargers produce is heat on the engine. other than that, both kinds of FI produce the same effect, more air/fuel into the engine cylinder.
the turbocharger is more efficient. The exhaust from the RSX-S is about 70hp right out the window. By using that exhaust to maximum effect, you are only providing a slight parasitic effect by creating backpressure in the exhaust until the turbo spools up.
The supercharger, on the other hand, draws power from the base power of the engine's crank. Not wasted power. By removing all the belts from the engine, you would have a perfect, no drag, engine. By adding the belts, you are drawing hp away from the car. Depending on the type of blower, it can be more or less, by the JRSC blower type, i.e. roots, is the most parasitic.
you tried to sum it up, but got alot wrong. On my website, I have some info which you could benfit to learn from. All it is is a learning tool for those who want to know a little bit more about forced induction applications. I am not selling anything on this site.