Super charged vs. standard engine?
I am considering a Mini-Cooper and wondering what the pros and cons are
regarding these two engine types. Of course I know the fundamental things, like lower gas mileage, more horse power with the super charge engine. What about maintenance, engine life, repairs, etc.,. I don't have any experience to draw on so any technical advice would be appreciated. -Larry |
As with a turbocharged car that extra power isn't free. It does come
at the cost of much lower mpg and higher engine wear if you have to be the first across the intersection all the time. But those generalizations apply to a normally aspirated engine too. OTOH if you drive like most other drivers and stay with the flow of traffic I don't think you will notice a big difference in milage and added engine wear will be negligible. A supercharger, like a turbocharger will eventually wear out and have to be replaced. But you can say that about several other automotive accessories too. So if you need (or want) the extra power that comes from a supercharger then go for it. Both of my cars have turbochargers, and I find the the added power to be very helpful at times. I would drive both the standard and supercharged version of the Cooper and base a decision on what seems to work the best for you and whether it is worth thre extra $$. The supercharger probably comes as a part of a package, so you will be getting (and paying for) several other goodies as well. The Cooper is a very attractive car in either configuration imho. |
really enjoyed my 96 Pontiac Bonne V6
traded it at 120K miles and it was still running like new very strong - lots of torque admit that I sold it before the supercharger failed fearing the $2k repair cost I believe it was an Eaton s.c. in it. Pretty neat, a low profile screw type air pump. "John S." > wrote in message ups.com... > As with a turbocharged car that extra power isn't free. It does come > at the cost of much lower mpg and higher engine wear if you have to be > the first across the intersection all the time. But those > generalizations apply to a normally aspirated engine too. OTOH if you > drive like most other drivers and stay with the flow of traffic I don't > think you will notice a big difference in milage and added engine wear > will be negligible. > > A supercharger, like a turbocharger will eventually wear out and have > to be replaced. But you can say that about several other automotive > accessories too. So if you need (or want) the extra power that comes > from a supercharger then go for it. > > Both of my cars have turbochargers, and I find the the added power to > be very helpful at times. I would drive both the standard and > supercharged version of the Cooper and base a decision on what seems to > work the best for you and whether it is worth thre extra $$. The > supercharger probably comes as a part of a package, so you will be > getting (and paying for) several other goodies as well. > > The Cooper is a very attractive car in either configuration imho. > |
larry g. olsen wrote: > Thanks for your insight. I gather from your remarks that having a super > charged engine does not add any significant maintenance factor or should I > say reliability problems over a standard engine. With any kind of forced induction, bearings going south are probably the most common failure. They can go bad prematurely if they overheat and/or there's oil contamination/wear/starvation. Pay attention to engine oil. Oil lubricates and (partially) cools the bearings. Regular changes using a high quality oil should reduce the chance of oil related failure, such as blocked oil passages, corrosion, abrasive, etc. I believe Mini only recommends high performance synthetic oils. Replacing a worn supercharger is probably less than rebuilding an engine. Even so - most of the newer ones are supposed to be more reliable than in years past; most newer superchargers are also water cooled which reduces bearing overheating. Take good care of it with regular oil changes, and it'll take good care of you. > I will test drive both versions when I get an opportunity but just wanted a > heads up from the technical group and not rely on dealer sales staff. > -Larry Have fun. |
larry g. olsen wrote: > Thanks for your insight. I gather from your remarks that having a super > charged engine does not add any significant maintenance factor or should I > say reliability problems over a standard engine. You are welcome. Those Coopers just look like they would be a lot of fun to drive. I took an Austin Mini from London to Penzance and return once, and it was a blast. The sensation of speed was amplified in that tiny car that was just inches off the ground. As long as you keep the maintenance up you should not have any problems, but that goes for any engine. A supercharger or turbocharger does essentially the same thing and both result in more power for the car without changing the physical size of the powerplant much. At one time both type of compressor had reliability and performance problems, but those days are way behind now. Both are reliable accessories. As someone else noted the turbo runs in engine oil, so just be perform regular oil changes and use synthetic. I've always changed oil every 3,000 to 3,500 miles no matter the car, and I've used synthetic in my cars since 1996. I see the difference at 200,000 miles when the engine still runs smoothly, gets good milage and when you look down into the oil gallery there is no evidence of sludging. Frequent oil changes are a cheap alternative to a prematurely wornout engine. |
John S. wrote:
> As with a turbocharged car that extra power isn't free. It does come > at the cost of much lower mpg and higher engine wear if you have to be > the first across the intersection all the time. But those > generalizations apply to a normally aspirated engine too. OTOH if you > drive like most other drivers and stay with the flow of traffic I don't > think you will notice a big difference in milage and added engine wear > will be negligible. > > A supercharged car can actually save a bit of gas in normal driving. An engine is not efficient at low throttle settings. In fact, it would be most efficient at wide open if it were not for power enrichment programming to aid drivability. If we have two engines, one with large displacement giving a certain horsepower, and another that is smaller, but turbocharged, then in normal driving at partial power- say ordinary street driving, the turbocharged car is running at a higher percentage of throttle, and hence a little more efficient. This is the same rationale that makes hybrids so efficient. Use a small engine and run it at a higher percentage of its power capability. Also, especially in a series hybrid, the IC engine does not need power enrichment because the electric motor does not create drivability problems. |
Don Stauffer wrote: > John S. wrote: > > As with a turbocharged car that extra power isn't free. It does come > > at the cost of much lower mpg and higher engine wear if you have to be > > the first across the intersection all the time. But those > > generalizations apply to a normally aspirated engine too. OTOH if you > > drive like most other drivers and stay with the flow of traffic I don't > > think you will notice a big difference in milage and added engine wear > > will be negligible. > > > > > A supercharged car can actually save a bit of gas in normal driving. An > engine is not efficient at low throttle settings. In fact, it would be > most efficient at wide open if it were not for power enrichment > programming to aid drivability. I thought a supercharger was demand based, i.e. not running at light throttle openings > > If we have two engines, one with large displacement giving a certain > horsepower, and another that is smaller, but turbocharged, then in > normal driving at partial power- say ordinary street driving, the > turbocharged car is running at a higher percentage of throttle, and > hence a little more efficient. Efficient as measured by mpg? > > This is the same rationale that makes hybrids so efficient. Use a small > engine and run it at a higher percentage of its power capability. Also, > especially in a series hybrid, the IC engine does not need power > enrichment because the electric motor does not create drivability problems. |
larry g. olsen wrote:
> I am considering a Mini-Cooper and wondering what the pros and cons are > regarding these two engine types. Of course I know the fundamental things, > like lower gas mileage, more horse power with the super charge engine. What > about maintenance, engine life, repairs, etc.,. I don't have any experience > to draw on so any technical advice would be appreciated. A mini is a car to buy because you love the great style and/or go-cart like handling. Buy it because you are passionate about it. Um, cuz' last I checked the reliability for mini coopers did not have great relatively. Both S and regular. http://autos.yahoo.com/newcars/mini_...liability.html http://autos.yahoo.com/newcars/mini_...liability.html http://autos.msn.com/research/vip/Re...er& trimid=-1 http://www.epinions.com/auto_Make-MINI_Manufacturer |
Brian-
Thanks for the URLs they provided some interesting reading. I have got to make a call into the dealer in Scottsdale and set up an appointment for test driving. Not too many dealers in the state of Arizona and probably not a buyers market:-) -Larry w on so any technical advice would be appreciated. > > A mini is a car to buy because you love the great style and/or go-cart > like handling. Buy it because you are passionate about it. > > Um, cuz' last I checked the reliability for mini coopers did not have > great relatively. Both S and regular. > > http://autos.yahoo.com/newcars/mini_...1/style_reliab > ility.html > http://autos.yahoo.com/newcars/mini_...0/style_reliab > ility.html > http://autos.msn.com/research/vip/Re...e=MINI&model=C > ooper&trimid=-1 > http://www.epinions.com/auto_Make-MINI_Manufacturer |
All times are GMT +1. The time now is 03:42 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
AutoBanter.com