What is better - Turbo or Supercharger?

[Ziggy122]

We had a debate today about which is better
Super or Turbo chargers

Wondered what your view are

 

[Liquid Knight]

Both. Mazda have been using a pulley initiated charger turbo combination for years called the Comprex Supercharger. The belt provides boost up until the exhaust back pressure is enough for it to take over. Lovely progressive boost and a near perfect torque curve.

Sadly due to the heat from Petrol engines it was only properly put to good use on the 626 Diesel.

I'd like one for my Fiorino.

 

[Eklipze3k]

:yeahthat:

http://www.seatandwheel.com/post/nissan-march-super-turbo.html

 

[StevenRB45]

Volkswagen twin charger set ups have a bit of a name for being pretty unreliable and complex and nightmarish to fix. Although that's down to daft design and german build quality.

Regards turbo or supercharger, it depends on the base characteristics of the engine its being applied to and what you want it to do, if you want mid range go and instant low end response supercharger, if you have an engine that has those things already but you wanna go faster turbo it, although modern turbos do spool up much faster. When I was looking at modding the swift I wanted a supercharger to fill the torque curve out at the bottom end.

 

[Liquid Knight]

So as "Both" isn't an option I'll go for a Turbo. Okay it's a little more involved than a Supercharger and the 20% or so friction the charger generates is evened out under boost but for efficiency sake the Turbo is and always will be the better option.

Long gone are the laggy days where waiting for a Turbo was like watching a V-Tech on a dynograph in slow motion. Variable profile fins, dual spline shafts and infinitely variable waste gates mean modern turbos can produce the flat torque curves at low boost everyone needs and impressive peak output at higher rpm than superchargers would allow the engine to rev' to.

 

[griff74]

I'll go for turbo, they are more effcient than super chargers and modern turbos, esp the variable ones like on our Citroen DS4 1.6 turbo 200thp have next to no lag, spins up very quick and is still giving plenty of boost when you get near the red line, plus I prefer the sound, while a loud whining SC sounds good, it would get tiring living with it day to day.

 

[Ziggy122]

I wouldnt complain on what the car had tbh, turbo or super

If i had a low grunter - long throw engine - super all the way

If it was good all round engine , turbo all the way hands down

Ziggy

 

[Mitchiet123]

Well I would've said turbo but after experiencing the supercharger on a 4.2 range rover vogue- supercharged all the way!!!

 

[dragonwagon]

Horses for courses really: low end torque - go supercharged. Revvy little thing = turbo.

however, modern computer controlled engines with variable vane turbos have upturned this theory somewhat evening out boost through the range with little of the lag of old. In terms of efficiency a turbo leads the way by using waste energy for its propulsion - superchargers absorb quite significant amounts of power.

Still think supercharges sound better - anyone else remember the two stroke supercharged Commer TS3 and Foden FD4 / FD6 diesels ?

Screaming banshees.....

 

[Ziggy122]

Yea - i think you hit the nail on the head tbh
Super for torqey - long throw engines

Turbo's for revvy engine that will benifit

Ziggy

 

[Alfettaman]

An old thread, I know, but in the 1980s (really showing my age now...) I had three new Fiat Uno Turbos - one at a time of course! From 2005-2012 I had a BMW MINI Cooper S (R53) which is supercharged.

Both were great cars, but I think the Uno was more efficient at modest speeds/around town/etc - partly because it's a much lighter car, but also a supercharger has to be driven all the time, even when you don't need it. That said, the MINI had a more seamless power delivery.

I really enjoyed driving both, and I wish I'd kept one of the Unos...

 

[Noxide]

I've no experience of either in fairness - NA wooo. I like big turbos that make a woosh. That's all I have to offer this debate.

 

[Sam7797]

How about a bit of both ?

 

[Pugglt Auld Jock]

Horses for courses really: low end torque - go supercharged. Revvy little thing = turbo.

however, modern computer controlled engines with variable vane turbos have upturned this theory somewhat evening out boost through the range with little of the lag of old. In terms of efficiency a turbo leads the way by using waste energy for its propulsion - superchargers absorb quite significant amounts of power.

Still think supercharges sound better - anyone else remember the two stroke supercharged Commer TS3 and Foden FD4 / FD6 diesels ?

Screaming banshees.....

Only just come across this thread. Drag racing and speed hilclimbing have been an interest for me for many years as has turbo/super charging. I remember the Commer 2stroke sound very well - glorious when pulling hard up a brae! There was a dark blue one with typical gold pinstriped coachwork used as a coal lorry when I was young. Always loved that sound! Just as I enjoyed the sound of an Ariel Arrow motorcycle and later the 3cylinder Kawasaki! Come to think of it a 3 cylinder Saab, DKW, Wartburg etc also sounds pretty good? Oh dear, there's no hope for me!

In addition to my FIAT affliction I'm also quite into VAG products having had several Skoda and SEAT branded versions in the family. One Skoda and one SEAT at present. I don't have any first hand experience of the "twincharged" engines but I hear they were pretty exciting to drive but lots to go wrong. Their Achilles heel, I believe, apart from the complexity, was that that whole family of engines had a weak timing chain design. There are many people complaining of early failures on the internet. The pistons were apparently another area of weakness on the higher powered versions. They seem to have taken this on board with the latest generation. My present daily driver (1 litre 3 Cylinder turboed petrol Ibiza) has the latest iteration of this engine which has gone "back" to a belt drive for the cam (HURRAH!). Let's just hope they've been looking at the pistons too! The only real criticism I could levy against it is turbo lag from very low revs. This becomes apparent if you let the car dribble along on a closed throttle, maybe 950 to 1000 rpm? In a traffic jam, with clutch fully engaged. Which I prefer to do rather than slipping the clutch. If the traffic then speeds up, when you first press the throttle pedal there is a couple of seconds of nothing happening until the turbo spools up. Under all other conditions throttle response is immediate and once you get used to it you just adapt your driving style to cope with it.

 

[Pugglt Auld Jock]

Just realised I rambled on there without answering the question. For a road car, with the sophistication of the modern turbo installation and electronics controlling it coupled with the simplicity of design I think the turbo wins every time. With one BIG qualification - you must use a high quality synthetic oil and change it regularly. The rpms these things turn and the temps they operate at put oils under extreme duress. I also believe that, if you've been operating the engine under conditions where high turbo temperatures are likely - for instance motorway driving or large throttle openings and high engine rpm - don't turn off the engine as soon as you pull to a halt, as I so often see in M6 service areas on my way Edinburgh to Devon to visit sister in law. The heat soak effect from the exhaust side of the turbo once there is no cooling air going through the intake side coupled to lack of oil circulation can have damaging effects on the oil in the turbo and so on its bearings and spindle. Interestingly I think my new car now has a water cooled turbo with a secondary, electrically driven water pump, ( oh dear, something else to go wrong!) Which can keep water circulating and cooling the turbo after switch off? Even with this though I will still be idling my engine for a couple of minutes to keep the oil circulating and allow heat soak effects to dissipate via the cooler intake air before switch off after arduous operation. Mechanically driven superchargers do have the advantage of instant throttle response but can't hope to compete on fuel economy and have more parts to wear out.

I've spent many happy hours in the Southern Maryland sunshine where my Daughter used to live, with a numb backside from sitting on the wooden bleachers, watching the Drag racers. Turbo's were just seriously starting to make their presence known on my last couple of visits but they were struggling with how to get good starts as it's difficult to get good boost when the engine is not under load, particularly with the large capacity turbo's they need. However I don't think there is anything as exciting as the sound of a monstrous Hemi V8 with an equally monstrous "Jimmy" blower whining away on top of it Chug, Chug, Chugging it's way to the start line with the eye watering smell of Methanol dosed with Nitro and the body shaking thunderous experience of a burn out! If the engine is mounted in a Competition Altered (like the Winged Express) that's just perfection!

 

[DaveMcT]

This hasn't got a turbo but the exhaust does the same job when it hits the power band. How about 20bhp from a home build 50cc. It really is just 50cc and about 18,000 revs. The whole series is worth a watch though at times frustrating.

 

[RobbyB]

Turbo