Quote:
|
Originally Posted by deliriousga
Between turbo and supercharger, I'd go with supercharger.
First, it's more efficient and quicker. The turbo has to have a certain exhaust flow before it really kicks in and loses some power since it restricts the exhaust a little. The supercharger winds up faster since it's belt driven and does not restrict the exhaust at all.
Second, the supercharger takes up less room. The turbo is harder to fit and takes more effort to install.
The plus for the turbo is when it winds up, it sounds cooler.  |
John,
A couple points, Supers are not more efficient than a Turbo. It's efficiency drops off rather quickly. Another disadvantage to the Super is the
Parasitic Loss since it draws Crank HP. In the case of the Jag XK8, at full spool up the Supercharger is drawing
86 Crank HP , there's still a considerable 100 HP Net gain though and the Super has little Lag.
The Turbo is essentially
Free because it's
Recovered Energy, and unlike the Super, (which can only spin as fast as the Crank, or some close derivative), the more power a Turbo makes, the more power it
can make. Turbines are much more efficient than a set of vaned rotors and so don't peak nearly as soon. Turbos do Lag, some more than others, but once they get going they come on strong.
Most people do not realize the Nature of
Forced Cars. They are
Schizophrenic, that is they have a Split Personality - one
On-Boost and one
Off-Boost. This can make them less enjoyable to drive than an NA Car because unless you're very good, the Boost can Come and Go at some fairly inconvenient times, especially on the Track, such as on the Apex and such where they can upset the Car's Balance and Line.
I love the Turbo in my Esprit, but I equally enjoy the fact that the Boxster is NA - the power delivery is much smoother and it's less of a handful to drive. As always, just my humble $0.02...
Happy Motoring!... Jim'99