Why are supercharged 4 cylinders so rare, both in stock and modded cars?

Why are supercharged 4 cylinders so rare, both in stock and modded cars?

Seems like an affordable and simple way to get a moderate power boost. Who cares if you lose a couple Em Pee Gees?

Other urls found in this thread:

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Twincharger#Commercial_availability
twitter.com/AnonBabble

More efficient to turbo them.

the crank geometry of inline four means they make all the power up top anyway
that ties in withonly really American and a few British makers bother with supercharging
with the notable exception of twinchargeing
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Twincharger#Commercial_availability

Merc did some afaik

are there aftermarket superchargers/ universal SC?
what has to be done in order to supercharge a car?

I have a Volkswagen TSI-Engine in my Shitbox. The TSI in this case stands for "Twincharged Stratified Injektion". There is a small Supercharger for boost in the low rev-range and a Turbocharger for the high rev-range.

But it's a 1.4 Liter. And VW.

afaik Mini used to strap superchargers to 4 cylinder engines.

Yes there are universal superchargers. Check Youtube for an explanation on how to do it

fuck why did you tell me
now I seriously want to throw money at my car

>Who cares if you lose a couple Em Pee Gees
the type of faggots who buy 4 bangers

had an old i-4 turbo volvo 740

terrible mpgs man

and it got beat by most newer cars

did have 200lbft torque tho

It's centrifugal superchargers that make all their boost up top. Turbos make mad torkz.

SUPER TURBO
S
U
P
E
R

T
U
R
B
O

it has one.
mercedes made a bunch of these engines

supercharger is harder to turn than a turbo, it has parasitic losses from the belt which impacts the overall gain you get by adding the supercharger, it is more efficient to use a turbo because to losses just a bit of lag.

>Turbos make mad torkz
still spooling at about 4000 rpm is pretty normal unless you get tricky with twin scroll and especially timed port systems

Mini coopers and mercedes have had the roots blown 4 cylinders, as mentioned. Cobalt SS/SC did too, not sure of any others.

ah, the great m111. easy to work on, reliable, nice extra power with just a few mods. Too bad the m271 comes nowhere close to this.

centrifugal superchargers are basically universal by design. they only need a bracket so the unit can be aligned with the rest of your engines pulleys. a lot of the time a bracket, a longer serpentine belt, intercooler and piping + bypass valve + s/c oiling kit is all that is needed to install an s/c into your car. its when you get into roots blowers and twin screws is when you have to have a customer intake manifold interface to accomodate the supercharger, and frankly it would raise the price by about 2-3 thousand over the equivalent centrifugal supercharger setup.

custom intake manifold interface*

Turbo's are better suited for cars that want their boost when they get to those high rpms, where as Superchargers are found primarily on bigger, more muscle like cars where they want the boost all the time.

Superchargers are also, in my experience, a lot easier to install and DIY than a turbo.

> tfw I'll never be able to afford making my car supercharged

tge kit itself yes
but not the rest
and with 170k km on an engine it wouldn't be the smartest decision I guess.

...

...

What I wouldn't give to drive one of those fuckers.
Currently own a 2012 1.6 4cyl March, but there's literally no way to make more power out of this. Suffering, it's a fun little car that handles great once you add some anti-roll bars.

The 4cyl engines issue is mid range torque. A supercharger would help marginally and make tons of power in the upper RPM range.

A for a OEM a properly sized turbo will spool quickly and generate large increases of midrange torque. It will then choke itself out at upper RPM ranges keeping power in warranty safe territory.

Because superchargers a shit, tbqh.

>turbo
>more torks
>more power
>more empeegees

>mfw morons spout memes about turbos being better than superchargers or superchargers being better than turbochargers while being too ignorant to realize they've got different characteristics which are better for different applications

Superchargers are inferior in every application. Especially now that we have variable geometry turbos and multiple turbo applications that virtually cancel lag.

>The 4cyl engines issue is mid range torque.
You certainly mean low range torque.

>Superchargers are inferior in every application. Especially now that we have variable geometry turbos and multiple turbo applications that virtually cancel lag.
kek the ignorance astounds

VGT's and multiple turbos (the latter of which have existed for decades now) do not solve the problem of packaging on a V engine though. Superchargers are ridiculously easy to apply there.

Because you can't (easily) turn them off, the way you can with a turbo and boost control. That means your I4 (your standard economy engine) suddenly takes a fuel economy hit. However, examples from Toyota and Mercedes exist - mostly centrifugals. We will see electric superchargers become prevalent in the next decade or so, to supplement turbo's. They are simpler, but not that much more affordable. Their packaging does not exceed that of a turbo. This means manufacturers will pick a turbo instead.

In the aftermarket, there is little no desire for sueprchargers, as they're seen as a better fit for V engines (which they are if you're talking about packaging). Also, there's very little supply for them.

>the crank geometry of inline four means they make all the power up top anyway
Explain this, because powerband shape is usually determined by airflow and bore:stroke ratio.

GM also made a supercharged ecotec in the 2.0 flavor. It was also sold as just the SC kit to bolt onto their 2.0/2.2 ecotec.
The Saturn Ion Redline and early Cobalt SS came with the SC engine already in it. There are also Chevy Caviler and Pontiac Sunfires out there with the SC on the motor. They later quit making the Ion and replaced the supercharger with a K04 turbo on the 2.0 ecotec.
The turbo just made it an all around better engine.

Some positive displacement superchargers offer intake manifolds for I4 engines, and welding a box isn't going to take 3K.

Bypass valve or are you thinking parasitic loss from a supercharger is more than flowing past a internal wastegate on a turbo?

>You certainly mean low range torque.

Low, mostly mid though. Most 4cyl are geared to sit at 2.5-3K at highway speeds

>parasitic loss from a supercharger is more than flowing past a internal wastegate on a turbo?
This. Not only will peak output (at identical boost pressure) always be less thanks to parasitic loss being greater than the losses create by a (properly sized) turbo in the exhaust stream, a freewheeling supercharger will always have more losses in terms of MPG compared to a turbo with the wastegate open.

OEM turbos are like breathing out through a straw, then they strap a massive cat right to the outlet flange to get it hot right after startup.

If you are talking aftermarket thats a whole other mess.

>MUH EFFICIENCY
nobody ever argues that a supercharger is more efficient power adder than a turbo, so I have no idea why that's always the pro-turbo point that comes up in the debate of ignorance, it's a given and everyone knows it. Turbos and superchargers have different characteristics that make them better for different things. You can hurr durr about compound variable geometry setups all you want but good luck putting one together when modding your car if you're chasing throttle response and linear power instead of peak numbers. The laggy T3/T4 I have on my car makes for great power on a budget but when I do track days or autocross I find myself wishing I had gone with a supercharger for the throttle response and linear power delivery. I'm constantly pedaling the car out of every corner because the power just comes on so fast and I have to put the pedal to the floor very early in the corner while it spools up then ease off at the right time to keep from turning a tidy corner into a massive drift.

Always wanted a subercharged s2k

> The laggy T3/T4

> sperg with a antique turbo.

Do me a favor and look at what VW is doing with their new 2.0T with a VNT and electrically controlled wastegate.

That much power, with that response and that broad of a torque curve. Its nowhere near the on/off switch thats your antique vac controlled garbage. Turbocharging is in its golden era.

don't superchargers need a certain amount of hp from the engine to even work in the first place? so 4cyl would be better off with turbo anyway.

or did i imagine that and i'm wrong?

Yes, but it scales linearly.

>DURR HURRRRRRRRRRRR HURRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRR
>STOCK VS AFTERMARKET
lel

Do me a favor and install a new electronically controlled variable geometry turbo on a non-turbo car :^)
Oh that's right you can't because you're incapable of the tuning required and you're also incapable of paying for it.

> Bringing aftermarket turbos info a discussion on why factory supercharged 4cyl engines.

3/10

>a discussion on why factory supercharged 4cyl engines.
learn to read shitwit
>Why are supercharged 4 cylinders so rare, both in stock and modded cars?
>stock and modded

>no lag
stahp

>Explain this, because power band shape is usually determined by airflow and bore:stroke ratio.
while this is true the timing events also have a part to play
4-1 results in more power high up
4-2-1 gives a little more mid range torque
4-3-2-1 only really sees use on reverse flow engines but has the same effect as 4-2-1

>you'll never own a subaru rex
Supercharged 600cc 4 banger is adorable as fuck

No fuck you what I like is perfect and what you like has no plausible benefits