im exaggerating im just saying how much the chevy supercharger sucks

 

Well, superchargers<turbos more than 90% of the time imho. There is more power loss from a supercharger and it also wears your engine down faster. They also tend to be less compressor efficient. I kinda think theres a reason that the major 4cyl. forced induction cars (STI, EVO, STR4) are all turbocharged. I don't know whey chevy went with a supercharger...

As far as the civic, as everyone else has said, hes definitely got you because it weighs so much less. You could always throw a nitrous kit on there and take him down though.

 

super chargers are linerar in their response, are easier to manage emissions wise. and unlike most turbos, usually last the life of the engine

 

Don't know man, don't you think that something running off a pulley right on the crank may cause more harm/stress than something running off the exhaust gases? I certainly could be wrong, but I know that a properly done turbo setup will last the engine 90% of an engine's life compared toif the enginewere n/a. Also keep in mind the supercharger is running 24/7 (I know there are a few expensive exceptions), whereas a turbo onlyprovides its power when you pass the boost threshold.

 

Well turbos are WAY more efficient than superchargers. Turbos use the exhausts wasted engery to create more power, while superchargers use the engines power to create more power. So in theory you are getting free horsepower. Go turbos!!!