5 Reasons Superchargers Are Dying Out

Superchargers are few and far between in the new car world these days. Here's why...
5 Reasons Superchargers Are Dying Out

Superchargers have been a staple of forced induction for decades, with the first supercharged cars strapping the compressors to the front of the engine before emigrating to sit either on top of the engine block or bolted to the engine’s flank. Despite the legendary whine of this induction method, superchargers are dying out with the dawn of downsizing and turbocharging.

It’s even looking like Jaguar might be leaving superchargers in the past, having once been stalwarts of the technology for the last couple of decades, and one of the few manufacturers still using them.

So why are they old hat?

1. Lack of efficiency

Roush is famous for their supercharger kits, especially on Mustangs
Roush is famous for their supercharger kits, especially on Mustangs

While turbochargers recycle exhaust gases and increase an engine’s efficiency, a supercharger is driven by a connection to a belt running from the crankshaft. This means that energy is being sapped from the engine’s natural rotation to power the supercharger. This is known as a parasitic loss.

The parasitic loss is also directly proportional to an increase in fuel consumption as the engine is working harder to produce the desired power, which these days is a massive black mark in any manufacturer’s book.

2. Dimensions

5 Reasons Superchargers Are Dying Out

With the automotive power war in full swing, it is fairly easy for a manufacturer to ramp up the power from a turbocharged engine by turning up boost pressure or fiddling with the turbine’s internals. For a supercharger to keep up in the same fashion, the dimensions of the entire ‘charger would have to increase in conjunction with the amount of desired boost, blowing up to something inconveniently heavy and massive.

3. Reliability

A popular modification for classic Minis is a small supercharger
A popular modification for classic Minis is a small supercharger

A supercharger puts a huge amount of stress on an engine through kinetic energy and heat production, therefore many engine components have to be over-engineered to cope with the additional strains put upon them. In most cases, this then leads to added weight and diminishing returns in terms of performance.

4. High weight placement

A pre-war Bentley Le Mans racer with a front-mounted supercharger directly connected to the crank
A pre-war Bentley Le Mans racer with a front-mounted supercharger directly…

The popular placement for a modern supercharger is above the bank of cylinders, with many V8 engines positioning it neatly above the engine’s V. Unfortunately, this means a large chunk of metal alloy is sitting very high in the engine bay, raising the overall centre of gravity of the car which could potentially disturb the car’s dynamics. An increase in height of the centre of gravity increases the rate of yaw and will lead to much more lateral lean during hard cornering; not something that’s ideal for performance car motoring.

5. Cost

The Roush Mustang in its Stage 3 tune, using a 670bhp supercharged V8
The Roush Mustang in its Stage 3 tune, using a 670bhp supercharged V8

The sheer amount of engineering that goes into supercharging a vehicle almost inevitably trickles down into the price tag. The additional reinforcing of standard components to meet the specifications for supercharging will inevitably lead to a higher price tag along with the need to use premium fuels in engines subjected to the stresses of forced induction of this manner.

5 Reasons Superchargers Are Dying Out

I personally love the sound and feel of a supercharger and would take one over a turbocharger on my Mk2 MX-5 any day of the week. Thee linear power delivery and the visceral shriek they pump into the cabin is truly addictive. Cars like the Vauxhall VXR8 and the Jaguar XKR-S are supercharged legends, or you could go the full whack and combine supercharging with turbocharging like Lancia on the brutal Delta S4. If there was ever an argument for supercharging, this onboard footage is it.

I’ll be sad to see superchargers consigned to the history books. They’re not perfect, but cars wouldn’t be any fun if they were flawless, would they?

Comments

Anonymous

Yeah a supercharger saps a bit of power.. but it gives much better low end boost! Granted, it doesn’t necessarily have that sudden burst of power in the high rpm range, but there’s a reason twincharging is a thing. Turn turbo lag into “But wait, there’s more!” in a serious way. Too much turbo on a car that doesn’t have the suspension/tire setup to handle the sudden boost could end badly too. Not that superchargers don’t need good suspension/tires to hold traction, it’s just not as bursty.

09/04/2016 - 12:35 |
12 | 0
Régis

Don’t burry Supercharger too fast :)
And particulary ones with “gearbox” which allows them to be used in the best efficiency area…

Low revs and low throttle engine work area are not a big concern if you have electric assistance, just sayin’

Oh and on your Mk2 Mx5 (1.8?) just put the small BW EFR and a well made exhaust manifold (1/4 &2/3 pair linked together) , apropriate camshaft (oem cam = Sh*t!) a good MSQ tune and you will not even remember how your supercharged NB was…

09/04/2016 - 12:36 |
0 | 0
Elias 3

Blower looks so good in almost any car that I would buy one just for cosmetics

09/04/2016 - 12:44 |
18 | 0
Anonymous

Well, you did manage to make some less important reasons seem crucial and to miss two key points of superchargers. Here’s what i think:

  • lack of efficiency isn’t so bad as it used to be, modern screw superchargers like the tvs series in jaguars have 75% peak efficiency, and that’s not bad at all!
  • cost isn’t an argument, you have to beef up an engine for turbos in the exact same manner and for the same cost.
  • dimensions… well, turbo engines need more plumbing and bigger intercoolers, so it’s not a valid point.
  • weight and center of gravity… yeah, tell that to the “hot vee” engines that added two turbos and two big catalytic converters up high. Haven’t done the math, but i’m pretty sure a supercharger will be lighter.
  • reliability hasn’t been explained well at all. What’s described is true for turbo engines too. The problem with supercharged engines is actually the belt drive. Sometimes it breaks, a lot of the time it slips. And more importantly, if you ask Tom Nelson, he’ll tell you the harmonics induced by the belt whipping takes its toll on the crank bearings. Turbo engines with the lower load on the accessory drive and the shorter belt won’t do that, and the bearings will be much happier.

And the biggest points you failed to address…
Boost pressure and behaviour.

  • To make modern engines meet the efficiency goals, they are highly turbocharged, the Fiat TwinAir pushes something like 22psi of boost. With a supercharger, 15psi is a lot, gives off crappy efficiency and a lot of heat to manage.
  • Also, superchargers add power everywhere evenly, so you can’t do the trick of low-end power and high-end drop-off that the OEMs like so much. You have to have the same top-end strength, wich means a faster car, the necessity for better suspension and brakes, and for countries that tax based on engine output, higher taxes and higher insurance premiums. To keep a weak top-end, you’d have to have a weak low-end and that puts people off when test driving.

The plus sides to superchargers are a couple: ask a mechanic what he’d rather work on, a hot, oily and high-revving turbo mounted somewhere quite inaccessible most of the times or a big cold lump of aluminium on top of the engine. And ease and cost of maintenance are quite important for OEMs
And superchargers give better NOx emissions because the exhaust isn’t as pressurised and as hot as one from a turbo engine, so if that ever becomes a thing you might see blowers make a comeback.

09/04/2016 - 12:47 |
250 | 4
Anonymous

In reply to by Anonymous (not verified)

Thank You!

09/04/2016 - 13:15 |
28 | 2
Dat Incredible Chadkake

In reply to by Anonymous (not verified)

The author just got rekt haha

09/04/2016 - 15:54 |
16 | 6
Anonymous

In reply to by Anonymous (not verified)

Well, you might think you’re right, but in the end all car manufacturers (their engineers) think you’re wrong, don’t get me wrong, I agree with you, you may have a general overview or even owned some cars with turbochargers, but you still can’t have the data they have on their cars, in the end you’re not the one who made the cars, so superchargers will still keep dying.

09/04/2016 - 18:29 |
0 | 4
phil93

In reply to by Anonymous (not verified)

Now that’s a thorough review. I myself find the twincharger to be the best of both world. The combination of whining and spooling sound from the little twincharged 1.4 TSI engine on my mk6 Golf is addictive. Good for a dogfight with a GTI

09/04/2016 - 19:06 |
10 | 0
Anonymous

In reply to by Anonymous (not verified)

There’s also the drive-ability factor of a supercharger - there’s no coming on boost so it’s a lot smoother and more importantly, predictable to drive.

Traditionally forced induction has been used to tune a car, not as a patch to make it through emissions.

Superchargers have never been more predominant anyway - the word “turbo” is easier to sell…

09/04/2016 - 19:42 |
14 | 2
Ray Sloan

You can get more boost from an sc by putting a bigger pully wheel on it.

09/04/2016 - 13:05 |
0 | 0

Smaller not bigger. You need the charger to turn faster. Smaller pulley for more turns. But there’s also a limit to that. You can over rev some chargers.

09/04/2016 - 13:41 |
2 | 0
Anonymous

I find most of these reasons absurd. Heat? Really. I guess the writer never saw the orange glowing exhaust system on a turbo. And all the extra exhaust plumbing , intercooler and oil coolers of the turbo. Sure the belt drive is parasitic but it can be made selectable which is huge plus for street driving. And I will be one of the first to buy the 48volt electric super charger when it comes out. Sure it will take a beefed up charging system. Big deal. We do that with audio systems and hydraulic kits already and big caps would really kick that motor up quickly. But sitting in traffic or just driving granny to the market, turn it off. Sure turbos are great but I find them far more complex and engine stressing than simple super charging. But I haven’t seen any 2, 3 or 4 supercharged cars like I do turbo boosted and that would be a downer to the high performance folks.

09/04/2016 - 13:11 |
2 | 0
Dave

In reality it is just cheaper for manufacturers to use tubos rather than superchargers. Also, you know that there is a thing such as pulley clutch which engages the s/c when needed

09/04/2016 - 13:18 |
2 | 0
Anonymous

In reply to by Dave

The tolerances in a supercharger are so close that if it’s not turning the engine would starve for air. There would also have to be a bypass that opens up. Then there’s the drop in compression anywhere from 14:1 to 8:1. That’s a high drop in performance.

09/04/2016 - 13:47 |
2 | 0
Anonymous

It depends on the type of car
If its a muscle car turbocharging it is stupid it ruins the v8 exhaust note
If its a gtr the engine is only a v6 so adding the turbocharger makes it alot more nicer to listen to
And i love both supercharger whine and turbo blow off valve

09/04/2016 - 14:38 |
0 | 0
495QED

Sir Les Edgar will keep on using supercharger if TVR is forced to go forced induction.

09/04/2016 - 14:47 |
2 | 0
Anonymous

In reply to by Anonymous (not verified)

all i have to say to this is yes!

09/04/2016 - 17:06 |
0 | 0

Topics

Sponsored Posts