Turbochargers VS Superchargers?

[JollySipper]

I'm just kinda wondering.... Does one have any advantages over the other?

[RW033]

Turbos are exhaust driven and require no horsepower to provide boost, but can have lag off the start, whereas a supercharger is driven mechanically off the crankshaft and requires engine power to provide boost but can provide boost quicker than a turbo. Superchargers can also be more difficult to package under the hood 

[Ace-Garageguy]

Excellent, simple overview by Ryan. ^^^

Edited July 10 by Ace-Garageguy

[JollySipper]

Yes, it is an excellent overview! and I pretty much understand how each work....... I'm more curious as to you guys' bias toward one or the other, and why........

[stitchdup]

it depends on the situation. for everyday i'd pick a supercharger but for going fast turbo. also my reason for a supercharger is most of my cars have been fwd and a turbo has the major drawback of torque steer when the boost kicks in. if you think its bad on a tuned rwd you want to try it when its also the steering wheels. theres a reason reno 5 and fwd escort turbos are hard to find and it wasn't a lack of supply, lol

[johnyrotten]

Supercharger's also have parasitic loss, they take power to turn. Turbo's build heat,as do blowers, there's no free lunch. Superchargers tend to make power lower in rpm, Turbo's the opposite. 

[Ace-Garageguy]

44 minutes ago, JollySipper said:

... I'm more curious as to you guys' bias toward one or the other, and why...

Like the two guys above me say, it depends entirely on the application and what you want out of the particular car.

It's hard to beat the instant HP from a mechanical supercharger, especially on a fast road car that has plenty of bottom end grunt to start with...like a V8.

Turbos are better for getting lotsa power out of small high-revving engines that you can keep in boost by keeping the revs up, but can be packaging nightmares with intercooler plumbing etc, and usually tend to dump a fair bit of heat in the engine bay.

There's no one "best" solution.

 

.

[1972coronet]

Conversely, the 2-stroke Detroit Diesels are considered naturally-aspirated in spite of all of them having a supercharger. The versions with turbos have a "-T" or "-TT" suffix ; to wit :

8V92-TT

[johnyrotten]

As Bill says above, it's all about application. Modern small displacement engines use smaller sized turbos to boost performance with minimal lag,and couple that to 6,8,10 speed transmissions to keep the engines in it's power band

[johnyrotten]

8 minutes ago, 1972coronet said:

Conversely, the 2-stroke Detroit Diesels are considered naturally-aspirated in spite of all of them having a supercharger. The versions with turbos have a "-T" or "-TT" suffix ; to wit :

8V92-TT

Those were more for scavenging than "boost" in that application as I understand it. Detroit's are the original source for the 4,6-71 blowers. 

[Ace-Garageguy]

1 hour ago, johnyrotten said:

Those were more for scavenging than "boost" in that application as I understand it. Detroit's are the original source for the 4,6-71 blowers. 

Exactly.

Barney Navarro, famed dry-lakes racer and mechanical wizard, is said to be the first to have used a GMC blower, specifically a 3-71 salvaged from a WW II landing craft engine. But another rodder named Jack Gillis was trying to make a 6-71 from an Army truck work on a flathead in a track car at about the same time.

Great stuff:   https://www.hotrod.com/features/barney-navarro-982-1647-112-1

                      https://www.hotrod.com/news/the-first-gmc-blown-roadster-jack-gillis

Edited July 11 by Ace-Garageguy

[1930fordpickup]

If it is a daily driver there is not difference when sitting in bumper to bumper traffic. 

Like the day I was sitting on the expressway next to a hellcat. My nephue looks over and says that would be cool to have that right now.  I said we are going the same speed in my F150.

[johnyrotten]

7 hours ago, Ace-Garageguy said:

Great stuff:   https://www.hotrod.com/features/barney-navarro-982-1647-112-1

                      https://www.hotrod.com/news/the-first-gmc-blown-roadster-jack-gillis

Great indeed. I was aware of Navarro, the Jack Gillis article is new to me. Thanks for posting this and the interesting morning read.👍👍

[espo]

Have owned a Pontiac GTP Grand Prix with the Eaton super charger on the 3.8-liter V-6. Great car and fast when you wanted it to be. Smooth acceleration when driven normally and instantaneous power when you wanted it. Have driven a few factory Turbo Charged cars and found the response to throttle input to be lazy and then goes like an ON-OFF switch when you put your foot in it.   

[JollySipper]

One of my dream cars is the SuperCoupe T-Bird from the late '80s into the '90s....... With a 5-speed, please! If you're gonna dream, dream BIG, huh?   

 

[SSNJim]

1 hour ago, JollySipper said:

One of my dream cars is the SuperCoupe T-Bird from the late '80s into the '90s....... With a 5-speed, please! If you're gonna dream, dream BIG, huh?   

 

I had an automatic 92 SC. Best car I've ever owned - I was devastated when I sold it. I expected it to be my forever car, but it was not to be. From what I remember, there were no manual transmission Super Coupes sold in 92.

[stitchdup]

are superchargers possibly more popular in the usa because of the auto boxes? a turbo can be made to drive with litle lag, but its the boost kick that makes thenm fun in the same way as the honda vtecs. it just feels a bit more special and even on the slow reno 5 and fiat uno turbos it still had that kick

[Fat Brian]

35 minutes ago, stitchdup said:

are superchargers possibly more popular in the usa because of the auto boxes? a turbo can be made to drive with litle lag, but its the boost kick that makes thenm fun in the same way as the honda vtecs. it just feels a bit more special and even on the slow reno 5 and fiat uno turbos it still had that kick

I think part of it is that for a long time turbos were looked at as "diesel stuff" and due to the horrible attempts at passenger car diesels in the 70s and 80s there was bias against them. They also didn't have the immediate visual impact of a huge roots blower sticking through the hood.

[peteski]

15 hours ago, stitchdup said:

are superchargers possibly more popular in the usa because of the auto boxes? a turbo can be made to drive with litle lag, but its the boost kick that makes thenm fun in the same way as the honda vtecs. it just feels a bit more special and even on the slow reno 5 and fiat uno turbos it still had that kick

I have driven a Mitsubishi Eclipse GS-T (Turbo) with 5-speed and I did enjoy that slightly laggy turbo kick.

While not really topical for this thread, I have also driven a Tesla, and that mash-your-body-into-the-seat rush of INSTANT acceleration is there any time you step in the accelerator (pretty much at any speed).  It was very impressive in a sedan without a 700+ hp. internal combustion engine.

[Ace-Garageguy]

16 hours ago, stitchdup said:

are superchargers possibly more popular in the usa because of the auto boxes?

To  certain extent, yes.

Until fairly recently, automatic transmissions were 3 or 4 speed units, possibly incorporating lockup torque converters.

This usually meant rather large differences in gear ratios in forward speeds and low RPM shift points, not particularly conducive to keeping turbocharged engines "on boost".

Don't forget the 1962 Oldsmobile Jetfire was the very first turboed production car, followed shortly by the Chevrolet Corvair. There were numerous problems with both of them, largely relating to owners' failure to keep the Jetfire's water injection bottles topped up, melted pistons and blown head gaskets as a result, oil leaks due to rapid seal failures from high operating temperatures, and turbos "coking up" on both of them.

The Jetfire could be had with a 3-speed slushbox, which was the more popular option on that car. The Corvair was more successful overall, but initially only available with a required 4-speed manual gearbox option. A 3-speed manual box was allowed later, but never an automatic, in large part because Corvairs used 2-speed Powerglides, not at all suited to keeping an engine "on boost".

The recent trend to "multi-speed" automatic boxes with 6 or even 8 or 10 forward ratios make high-revving small displacement engines (with turbochargers added to achieve adequate performance in heavyish crashmobiles) a more viable option, but not without consequences.

Small high-revving engines with turbochargers generally have much shorter lifespans than larger slower-revving engines with no boost, for what should be entirely obvious reasons.

The highly complex automatic boxes, with necessarily small internal components for packaging within a reasonable volume, are collections of problems waiting to happen too...and almost universal unavailability of repair parts just makes everything worse.

 

Edited July 12 by Ace-Garageguy

[1972coronet]

53 minutes ago, Ace-Garageguy said:

The recent trend to "multi-speed" automatic boxes with 6 or even 8 or 10 forward ratios make high-revving small displacement engines (with turbochargers added to achieve adequate performance) a more viable option, but not without consequences.

100%. The work vehicle I drive - the company vehicle - is a 2022 Ranger which has the Fœcal-Boost 4 cylinder which is backed with a 10 speed auto. 

It's cumbersome. 

The transmission will hit a "dead zone" where it hangs up between one of its 10,000 forward gears. Then, it'll catch and the truck'll finally take off. Leaves others with the impression that either I'm in an inexperienced driver, or that I'm some teen with a new licence.

The 2008 Ranger was a vastly superior vehicle, period. Inline 4 with the 5-speed auto ( 5R55W, I seem to remember ) and 4.10 gear ( and no "distracto-tainment" screens nor any other rubbish ). It was seat-of-the-pants quicker than the turbo-10-speed-techie-festooned 2022.

And, it returned better fuel economy. 

[johnyrotten]

21 minutes ago, 1972coronet said:

The 2008 Ranger was a vastly superior vehicle,

These trucks are some of the best I've owned(I've had four) and believe me I was never polite to them. Ford built a winner with these,and for some reason abandoned the formula for a good small truck.

[MeatMan]

Many newer cars with turbos come with Variable Geometry Turbos (VGT) where the vanes in the turbo change depending on the speed to reduce lag. Which also, unfortunately makes them more expensive, and probably less reliable.

[Ace-Garageguy]

51 minutes ago, johnyrotten said:

These trucks are some of the best I've owned(I've had four) and believe me I was never polite to them. Ford built a winner with these, and for some reason abandoned the formula for a good small truck.

I believe in large part because the image of "truck" has evolved from "working man's tool" to "compensatory fashion statement".

Who can you impress with your pretend masculinity driving a little truck?

[johnyrotten]

36 minutes ago, Ace-Garageguy said:

the image of "truck" has evolved from "working man's tool" to "compensatory fashion statement".

Isn't this the truth.