Quote:
Originally Posted by ZX-10R
I know, ancient question but still interesting to hear perspectives. How many turbo cars have you owned and will you go back?
In terms of power potential, there isn't much of an argument. BMW is squeezing 520 rwhp (dyno, not claimed) out of a 3.0 L motor. Most ZL1s don't put down much more (560 on average) with DOUBLE the displacement (granted 24 psi vs 9 psi). McLaren gets 750 rwhp out of a 4.0 L. Quite a few Audi guys get 600+ out of their 2.5L (modded)
Turbo lag isn't the argument it once was, lag is there at lower rpm, but not terrible. Supercharger generates a very linear power curve but also a little boring? Better gas mileage when you're cruising is another advantage.
Please no EV stuff, we know a Plaid will do x in a roll on
|
I have owned several turbo engine cars and but I now have a C6 Grand Sport that has a positive displacement supercharger.
With most turbo cars which use a single turbo, the turbo is sized for a certain RPM range. So either they have a small turbo that spools quickly with no or little lag but then fall on their face in the upper RPM range. Or they have a larger turbo that doesn't start to build power until 3K or more RPM's but pull to redline. Now cars that are twin turboed with both a small and a larger turbo will have power everywhere but those are much less common nowadays.
The thing I like with my PD supercharged C6 is that it has power everywhere and behaves just like a naturally aspirated car. Instant torque no matter what RPM. And there is little parasitic loss as it has a bi-pass valve when not in boost (most modern supercharged engines have this).
And then there are the centrifugal superchargers like ProCharger that are basically a belt driven turbo. Not as much boost off idle but boost continues to build higher and higher as RPM increases.
So I like both turbos and superchargers but favor superchargers.