Superchargers and Turbo's all have their advantages. A supercharger can engage earlier and provide smoother power distribution, whilst a turbo can provide more power at a later time (often giving that 'kick in the a$$' feeling) without sucking power from the engine in order to engage (the supercharger is run by the engine, whilst the turbo runs from exhaust pressure).
Different forms of function, each of which can be useful in their own place. I think the reason why MB went with Turbo for their '65' and recent '600' engines (CL, S and SL all come with the bi-turbo 6 liter engine) was due to the 'cool' image that most people associate with turbos. Had they wanted to, they could have built enough boost while running the superchargers, but a turbo was a simple way to make things work (nevermind the fact that a supercharger would have ended up causing gas consumption in these monsters to rise higher then with the turbo's I believe).
But as it seems, MB is probably moving away from SC's and Turbo's to consentrate on NA engines once again...
__________________
My new car: MB SLK55 AMG (36months, 40,000miles and still flawless)
My old car: MB SLK230K Brabus - sold
|
Threaded Mode