why are v8 are generally supercharged and not turbocharged?

[///AMG]

Originally Posted by Boyd

SC was created in the beginning of 1900....
TC was really used by Renault in F1 in 1979
Before turbo wasn't used


Renault F1 turbo

1962 Oldsmobile Jetfire (a regular production car, not a concept):
http://www.442.com/oldsfaq/ofjet.htm
http://homepage.sunrise.ch/homepage/...3jetdaten.html

This was the first production passenger car to use a turbocharger.

[Blackmilk]

I speak of sport use

[Pearlrps]

SC are good but the only downside I can see to them is that it's always running. With TC you can control the power output a little better with the throttle. Granted it is so f*cking cheap to do upgrades to a SC for more power. With TC after you pay $300-600 for a boost controller it is easy vs buying a different pulley.

[///AMG]

Originally Posted by Pearlrps

SC are good but the only downside I can see to them is that it's always running. With TC you can control the power output a little better with the throttle... <snip>

Lots of SC cars have a clutch on the supercharger that disengages it, similar to the clutch on an A/C compressor. Granted that's more of an on/off solution, but at least it's not always running.

[JohnnyWash1]

Originally Posted by Pearlrps

SC are good but the only downside I can see to them is that it's always running. With TC you can control the power output a little better with the throttle. Granted it is so f*cking cheap to do upgrades to a SC for more power. With TC after you pay $300-600 for a boost controller it is easy vs buying a different pulley.

I agree with AMG on this one.

However, I disagree with Pearl and the Turbo throttle control. Power is much more linear at high boost levels with a supercharger than with a turbocharger. The last thing you want mid corner is for boost to hit a couple seconds after you hit the throttle. In fact, they have systems in place in WRC to prevent this (called Anti-Lag systems--I think).


Jon

[CRISTIAN]

ok, so if a turbocharged setup (twin or not) is always better than a supercharged setup; why are some of the extremely expensive cars using supercharger (amg sl55) when they can afford the more expensive turbo setup for a bit more power?

[JohnnyWash1]

Originally Posted by CRISTIAN

ok, so if a turbocharged setup (twin or not) is always better than a supercharged setup; why are some of the extremely expensive cars using supercharger (amg sl55) when they can afford the more expensive turbo setup for a bit more power?

It's not always about the money. It has alot to do with what the engineers are trying to accomplish. Turbos and supers work differently and therefore create a different driving experience. Also, tuning is a big issue, as is reliability. There are just too many differences besides cost that affect this decision.


Jon

[Pearlrps]

You have to remember that there is very little to no room left under the hood of a V-8 vehicle to run a twin turbo set up. I'm helping a friend put a T56 mission in his automatic Camaro right now and that fricking engine was put in there with a shoe horn.