Which is better? I feel like NA is when the planets align, but then is that really "better"? I'm talking overall... ownership, experience, everything.
Turbo, especially the contemporary flavour, provide a much better range of driving experiences...depending on your mood.
Personally, I prefer NA, but that's only because I love the sounds.
If I had to choose one I'd go turbo because I live at altitude and here the advantage in power and efficiency is too high to ignore.
Other than that, each has its advantages. It also depends on the specific engines since there are both crappy and great engines in each category.
I´d say that for most everyday situations, including a sporting mountain drive, turbos are superior because of their low end torque that makes them a lot of accesible fun.
For balls out driving, NA is a better experience (with a great high-revving NA engine) because of the minutely controlled throttle and the linearity in power over a huge RPM band. The rush to redline say, on the M5, is exhilarating.
Sound as mentioned is also an N/A strength. It's tough to make a turbo sound nice naturally.
I want to/feel obligated to prefer NA but there are just so many asterisks. It's better
- IF you live at sea level
- IF your car/bike is light WRT the engine (>1cc/lb with you in it and it revs to 7000+, IMO)
- IF you can ring it out often
- IF you can clear its throat (intake, exhaust etc)
- IF you dont care about gas mileage
- IF IF IF
For a street car I'm just not sure. For some reason turbo cars sound like ass today, I'm guessing cause they give em tiny lil low RPM cams for max low end boost. But they used to sound decent and turbocharged NA motors still sound great.
Turbochargers inherently deaden the exhaust sound. That's why it's possible for cars like the SRT Neon and 500 Abarth to come from the factory without mufflers and still meet all noise limit ordinances.
N/A by a millions miles - turbos suck except for extreme cases (STi, very high altitude, etc.). Simply look at the 6.2L V8 Camaro, Corvette and Silverado vs. the competition/competitors. As good or better performance and economy, sound better, no lag, and light years ahead in durability and ownership costs.
Turbos are more versatile, efficient, and are a certain kind of fun.
But require more maintenance and a better driver.
All of the above is why I choose turbo.
I like turbo power delivery. It's kinda fun.
I'm Old School! I'll take a Big Ole V8 over a Turbo 4 or 6 any day of the week!
Quote from: 280Z Turbo on October 06, 2015, 11:50:55 PM
I like turbo power delivery. It's kinda fun.
Agreed. I miss b00st.
I do miss a turbo in my life. I love my NA I6, but I love turbo power delivery too. And the whoosh.
Everyone is too caught up in this vs. that and they really miss out on so much.
Quote from: Raza on October 09, 2015, 08:29:58 AM
I do miss a turbo in my life. I love my NA I6, but I love turbo power delivery too. And the whoosh.
Everyone is too caught up in this vs. that and they really miss out on so much.
This. Both are good, just different.
Quote from: Raza on October 09, 2015, 08:29:58 AM
Everyone is too caught up in this vs. that and they really miss out on so much.
I say that to straight guys all the time
Quote from: 2o6 on October 09, 2015, 09:26:43 AM
I say that to straight guys all the time
Ew. Guys are gross.
I am by no means an expert but I grew up with naturally aspirated engines and I do appreciate the instantaneous response of the motor in my car when I press the accelerator. No delay, no lag, just an immediate response (I just wish I had more torque!).
In my mindset I have the ingrained [and possibly misguided] view that a turbo engine is more complex and requires more delicate care. For example, on many older turbo cars you're advised to let the engine idle for 1-3 minutes before shutting it off in order to give the oil time to drain from the turbos (I know this is an absolute must for older turbo cars, particularly Italian vehicles such as the Lancia Delta performance models for example). These days there are pumps that handle this after the engine has been shut down (saw it in action during my BMW M5 F10 shoot), but still it strikes me as complex.
In all honesty I've not driven many turbo cars. We owned a turbocharged and intercooled 1996 Mitsubishi Pajero 2500 back in the day, but heavy lag is expected of older turbodiesels from that era. In fact most of the turbo cars that I've driven were turbodiesels. Working at a Mercedes dealer back in the day, however, also exposed me to some gasoline-powered turbo cars like the B200 Turbo and the Mercedes CL600 V12 Biturbo - and even though they were quite good, there was always noticeable lag, especially in the B200 Turbo.
The last turbo car I drove was a new Audi A5 2.0 TDI Convertible (FWD). I liked the engine for its smoothness and refinement, but the lag was absolutely horrendous. It was paired to the DSG transmission and at traffic lights it took a full second for the car to move after I pressed the accelerator.
I am kind of saddened that you can't get a N/A engine anymore from most [affordable] manufacturers.
Quote from: cawimmer430 on October 14, 2015, 06:58:38 AM
I am by no means an expert but I grew up with naturally aspirated engines and I do appreciate the instantaneous response of the motor in my car when I press the accelerator. No delay, no lag, just an immediate response (I just wish I had more torque!).
In my mindset I have the ingrained [and possibly misguided] view that a turbo engine is more complex and requires more delicate care. For example, on many older turbo cars you're advised to let the engine idle for 1-3 minutes before shutting it off in order to give the oil time to drain from the turbos (I know this is an absolute must for older turbo cars, particularly Italian vehicles such as the Lancia Delta performance models for example). These days there are pumps that handle this after the engine has been shut down (saw it in action during my BMW M5 F10 shoot), but still it strikes me as complex.
In all honesty I've not driven many turbo cars. We owned a turbocharged and intercooled 1996 Mitsubishi Pajero 2500 back in the day, but heavy lag is expected of older turbodiesels from that era. In fact most of the turbo cars that I've driven were turbodiesels. Working at a Mercedes dealer back in the day, however, also exposed me to some gasoline-powered turbo cars like the B200 Turbo and the Mercedes CL600 V12 Biturbo - and even though they were quite good, there was always noticeable lag, especially in the B200 Turbo.
The last turbo car I drove was a new Audi A5 2.0 TDI Convertible (FWD). I liked the engine for its smoothness and refinement, but the lag was absolutely horrendous. It was paired to the DSG transmission and at traffic lights it took a full second for the car to move after I pressed the accelerator.
I am kind of saddened that you can't get a N/A engine anymore from most [affordable] manufacturers.
You are definitely not mistaken about complexity. Generally, a turbo will necessarily be more complex.
However, like I said above, it's not that relevant to compare in general turbo vs. n/a. Engine vs engine is more relevant. N/A engines range from econoboxes to Ferrari (or dare I say BMW) masterpieces. Same with turbos. That TDI you drove is pretty mundane compared to the turbo in say, a McLaren.
Quote from: MexicoCityM3 on October 14, 2015, 07:21:01 AM
You are definitely not mistaken about complexity. Generally, a turbo will necessarily be more complex.
However, like I said above, it's not that relevant to compare in general turbo vs. n/a. Engine vs engine is more relevant. N/A engines range from econoboxes to Ferrari (or dare I say BMW) masterpieces. Same with turbos. That TDI you drove is pretty mundane compared to the turbo in say, a McLaren.
Oh I would never compare the turbo in a normal TDI-powered car to a high-performance turbocharged car like the current McLarens. There will definitely be huge differences.
When I drove that Mercedes CL600 V12 Biturbo I couldn't really detect any turbo lag. It was definitely there, but it was "masked" so brilliantly that you couldn't detect it (at least I couldn't). But that B200 Turbo? Turbo lag all over (and massive torque steer).
I once got a ride in London in a Mercedes S600 V12 Biturbo (W220) and even as a passenger I couldn't detect any turbo lag. The driver floored it and the engine seemed to respond instantaneously as did the acceleration.
Perhaps larger and more power engines are better at "eliminating" turbo lag. Not sure since I am not a mechanic or engineer.
These electric turbochargers that are the talk of the town seem to be very promising, though.
Thing is the electric turbo(super)charger will be in ADDITION to the regular turbocharger. The former will be relatively small and operate during the first second or two of throttle application to mitigate/eliminate lag.
Quote from: GoCougs on October 14, 2015, 12:28:27 PM
Thing is the electric turbo(super)charger will be in ADDITION to the regular turbocharger. The former will be relatively small and operate during the first second or two of throttle application to mitigate/eliminate lag.
For simplicity's sake I hope they combine the two. Let the electric side spool up the compressor when the exhaust can't. One less compressor = a lot less heartache. Hopefully the road going versions will work better than the ones in F1 though....