Jaguar F-Pace Forum banner
1 - 20 of 38 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
932 Posts
I prefer a supercharged engine over a turbocharged one. I used to have a turbo A5 and I could really notice the turbo lag.
 

·
Administrator
Joined
·
1,973 Posts
That's why some manufacturers use small super chargers that are already spooled up and ready to go until the turbo charger ramps up. Sometimes the best of both works well.
 

·
F Pace Expert
Joined
·
2,583 Posts
Timely, I was just asked again about this today by friends driving the f-pace and I never knew the answer. I said "turbochargers are sooo 80's, like Saab 80's"
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,617 Posts
That's why some manufacturers use small super chargers that are already spooled up and ready to go until the turbo charger ramps up. Sometimes the best of both works well.
Volvo XC90 SUV has both. That's why it has good pickup despite the 4-cylinder engine.
 

·
Administrator
Joined
·
1,973 Posts
Turbo chargers are common place today. Ford uses them in their eco-boost engines, Lexus, GM, Chrysler and the list goes on. Some engines use twin turbo chargers. They are mostly used on 2.0L 4cyl engines. Just like Jaguars 2.0L diesel on the F Pace. That's not 80's now.;)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,115 Posts
Turbo chargers are common place today. Ford uses them in their eco-boost engines, Lexus, GM, Chrysler and the list goes on. Some engines use twin turbo chargers. They are mostly used on 2.0L 4cyl engines. Just like Jaguars 2.0L diesel on the F Pace. That's not 80's now.;)
I think every manufacturer has at least one turbo charged engine in their lineup. I am not aware of any that do not have at least one turbo charged engine. Most economy brands only have 2.0 liter turbos but most luxury brands have turbo V6's, V8's and less common but still V12's

Superchargers are less common, though im not sure why. They are much more reliable :confused:
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
298 Posts
Timely, I was just asked again about this today by friends driving the f-pace and I never knew the answer. I said "turbochargers are sooo 80's, like Saab 80's"
Really? I guess we better call BMW M division, Mercedes AMG, Audi RS -and Ferrari as well & tell them Turbos are outdated. Are you really comparing current turbocharger tech to a 80's Saab?
And what will your response be when Jaguar puts their new Twin TURBO inline 6 in the FPace.
And any time you want to drag my 650i Twin Turbo V8 with 508hp/500 lb torque -let me know
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
33 Posts
I think you can argue the main reason is that turbos have become popular is that they are essentially recycling energy you'd otherwise lose entirely, which is a consideration in a CAFE-driven world.

The power from exhaust gasses powering a turbocharger that go out at a certain velocity is "free." By contrast, some amount of additional energy goes into compressing intake air with a supercharger (either electrically or solely mechanically). That is energy you only partly get back by burning more fuel.

So, as metallurgy and manufacturing processes become precise enough to allow routine deployment of a device that spins at 60-100k rpm, the economics and performance gains are more and more compelling.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
298 Posts
I think you can argue the main reason is that turbos have become popular is that they are essentially recycling energy you'd otherwise lose entirely, which is a consideration in a CAFE-driven world.

The power from exhaust gasses powering a turbocharger that go out at a certain velocity is "free." By contrast, some amount of additional energy goes into compressing intake air with a supercharger (either electrically or solely mechanically). That is energy you only partly get back by burning more fuel.

So, as metallurgy and manufacturing processes become precise enough to allow routine deployment of a device that spins at 60-100k rpm, the economics and performance gains are more and more compelling.

One other advantage of turbocharging. Compare the 3 liter engines of the Benz GLC 43 to the FPace S.

Benz - Twin turbo 362HP @5200rpm/384 lb torque @2000rpm
Jag- Supercharged - 380HP @ 6500rpm/332 lb torque @4500rpm.

They are close in HP but the Benz has 16% more torque. But more importantly look at the revs required to generate the torque. More than double for the Jag. The turbo engine feels more responsive down low & generates the power much faster. Even the HP - the Jag needs 1300 more rpm to make it's power peak. No wonder turbos dominate on high end cars.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,115 Posts
One other advantage of turbocharging. Compare the 3 liter engines of the Benz GLC 43 to the FPace S.

Benz - Twin turbo 362HP @5200rpm/384 lb torque @2000rpm
Jag- Supercharged - 380HP @ 6500rpm/332 lb torque @4500rpm.

They are close in HP but the Benz has 16% more torque. But more importantly look at the revs required to generate the torque. More than double for the Jag. The turbo engine feels more responsive down low & generates the power much faster. Even the HP - the Jag needs 1300 more rpm to make it's power peak. No wonder turbos dominate on high end cars.
Ever heard of turbo lag... there is no such thing in a supercharged car because the supercharger is connected directly to the engine via the crankshaft (i.e. NO LAG), where as in a turbocharger you have a slight delay before it can spool up. Turbos are more common because they are more efficient and thats the only reason.
 

·
Administrator
Joined
·
1,973 Posts
Ever heard of turbo lag... there is no such thing in a supercharged car because the supercharger is connected directly to the engine via the crankshaft (i.e. NO LAG), where as in a turbocharger you have a slight delay before it can spool up. Turbos are more common because they are more efficient and thats the only reason.
Hmmm........lets see now

Benz - Twin turbo 362HP @5200rpm/384 lb torque @2000rpm
Jag- Supercharged - 380HP @ 6500rpm/332 lb torque @4500rpm

0-60

Benz 4.5 seconds
Jag 5.1 seconds

Turbo lag did I hear something about t t t t urbo l l l ag!!!!!!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
132 Posts
Ever heard of turbo lag... there is no such thing in a supercharged car because the supercharger is connected directly to the engine via the crankshaft (i.e. NO LAG), where as in a turbocharger you have a slight delay before it can spool up. Turbos are more common because they are more efficient and thats the only reason.
You may be the one still living in the past.

Most manufacturer's have gone to TWIN turbos which all but eliminates the lag of the single turbo versions.
0:)

Turbos make more power more effifiently. Many superchargers also oftem require intercoolers and often even then sitll suffer from heat soak in the summer.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
298 Posts
You may be the one still living in the past.

Most manufacturer's have gone to TWIN turbos which all but eliminates the lag of the single turbo versions.
0:)

Turbos make more power more effifiently. Many superchargers also oftem require intercoolers and often even then sitll suffer from heat soak in the summer.
Nope these guys don't want to acknowledge that modern twin dual scroll turbos have effectively eliminated turbo lag.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
298 Posts
Ever heard of turbo lag... there is no such thing in a supercharged car because the supercharger is connected directly to the engine via the crankshaft (i.e. NO LAG), where as in a turbocharger you have a slight delay before it can spool up. Turbos are more common because they are more efficient and thats the only reason.
So you missed the markedly lower rpm that turbos make power & torque? Big advantage over superchargers. And you think Ferrari for instance installed twin turbos in their new V8 powered $250,000 488 by mistake?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
589 Posts
So you missed the markedly lower rpm that turbos make power & torque? Big advantage over superchargers. And you think Ferrari for instance installed twin turbos in their new V8 powered $250,000 488 by mistake?
Superchargers are reputed to give better power at lower RPM. Perhaps turbo development has helped close the gap, but turbos generate boost by using exhaust pressure (which is less at low RPM) while superchargers are mechanically driven and tend to be tuned to produce more power at lower RPM (where they are more efficient).
Other factors can also affect total horsepower and torque and are probably in play here to explain the differences between the two cars.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,115 Posts
So you missed the markedly lower rpm that turbos make power & torque? Big advantage over superchargers. And you think Ferrari for instance installed twin turbos in their new V8 powered $250,000 488 by mistake?
I didn't say any of automaker does anything by mistake, you must of misread what I said. Again, to eliminate turbo lag altogether is impossible, AMG, Ferrari and other high end automakers have done a fantastic job at minimizing it because they are focused more on power delivery than they are on fuel efficiency, but there is always turbo lag.

Another issue with turbos, they are designed to deliver boost within a certain RPM range. Why do you think power is delivered so early on in the power band? Power tends to teeter off the closer you get to redline.

Turbos also require A LOT more maintenance, and if you don't keep up with the maintenance bad things will happen.

The only con of a supercharger? Low fuel efficiency.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,115 Posts
You may be the one still living in the past.

Most manufacturer's have gone to TWIN turbos which all but eliminates the lag of the single turbo versions.
0:)

Turbos make more power more effifiently. Many superchargers also oftem require intercoolers and often even then sitll suffer from heat soak in the summer.
Unfortunately you are incorrect. While AMG and others have made great strides in minimizing turbo lag it is still evident, especially off the line. Like I said turbos are more efficient and that is about the only benefit along with low end power. Even people who own AMGs comment about the slight turbo lag they experience, just venture on over to a Mercedes forum and look for yourself.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,115 Posts
Hmmm........lets see now

Benz - Twin turbo 362HP @5200rpm/384 lb torque @2000rpm
Jag- Supercharged - 380HP @ 6500rpm/332 lb torque @4500rpm

0-60

Benz 4.5 seconds
Jag 5.1 seconds

Turbo lag did I hear something about t t t t urbo l l l ag!!!!!!
If you think the only thing that makes the Benz quicker to 60 is the twin turbo... :eek:
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
1,452 Posts
Supercharger are the most inefficient methods of forced induction. I think the number is something like 30% or more potential power loss by supercharging vs turbo? Which is effectively saying it takes 30% more supercharger (lol, not trying to be technical) to get the same level of efficiency in power increase as a turbo.

Mercedes is doing a lot of "in the v" - putting a single turbo nestled in a 90 degree v6 to shorten to distance air has to travel, also helping eliminate turbo lag.

I love BOTH of my 3.0L supercharged engines, but the future may be headed to more turbos. However I was reading an article the other month talking about how the craze of significantly reducing displacement and adding a turbo isn't having the effect they were hoping for - and it might make sense to go back to larger displacement engines again (think small 1.7L engines going back to 2.5L).

Time will tell.
 
1 - 20 of 38 Posts
Top