S/C is gonna have a lot more torque than a turbo because it works at lower rpm's and is instant-on power.

 

I tend to agree with this statement. A S/C can be adjusted as to when it can start to give useable boost by putting on a smaller pulley. A Turbo has that "spool up" time, although this can be cured with different turbo sizing and using sequential setups. Unfortunately, with the S, sequential setups have not as yet been proven to actually work with a driveable car.

 

Toda Cams have proven to give a decent amount of low end boost. Though this is staying in the non-FI arena!!!

 

Holden 5.7L V8??? Dont you mean Chevrolet 350 V8???

 

Holden=Chevrolet

 

That depends on whether you're right way up or upside down. For all you upside down people on the other side of the earth, it might be a Chevy. For us right minded people in Australia, it's Holden.

 

Ummm... no. S/C's revs are related to engine revs, so by definition, maximum boost occurs only at redline after increasing linearly. Example:

 

a positive displacement SC would do it. a centrifugal will not.

 

and centrifugal airflow is a square relationship to rpm.

 

We're talking about the S2000 here... not supercharger theory. If you think the SC'ed S2000's are producing as much torque as the turbocharged ones then I'll take a wild guess and say that you don't have a clue as to what you're talking about. Oh... and my previous reply still stands. Nitrous, turbo then the SC.