Would you guys be OK with a smaller displacement, turbocharged V8s in future muscle cars? The Mercedes' 4...

Would you guys be OK with a smaller displacement, turbocharged V8s in future muscle cars? The Mercedes' 4.0 V8 sounds pretty damn good for a turbo engine desu, I think it would be fine (pic unrelated).

i want v12 biturbo e class desu

>turbo
Yes
>smaller displacement
Fuck right off.

The only muscle car in production right now is the Challenger, and it deserves a 426ci twinturbo V8. I was already pissed when they downsized the Hellcat from 392ci to some metric bullshit number ''because reliability'', as if that's an FCA hallmark.

I'd rather have a superior twin screw turbo instead of tiny weak fart spinners. No additional tubing, no obnoxious blow off valves, EGR wizardry.

Fuck no. A hererosized crate engine does everything that over complicated piece of shit does. You might as well go V6 at that point.

Dude, I'm talking about entry level V8 trims, like the 6.4, GT and SS, not expensive stuff like the Hellcat, ZL1 and GT500.

>twin screw turbo
Wat.

If you mean a twin screw supercharger, that's not as efficient or powerful as a set of turbo's.
If you mean a twin scroll turbo, a single one of those doesn't package well in a production V8 engine bay. Might as well put two twinscrolls in there then - and you'll still need BOV's/wastegates.

SHALL
NOT
BE
INFRINGED

Seriously, downsizing has no place there, especially with turbo's since they'll drive the price of those entry level models way up.

Mild hangover, I meant supercharger.

Turbos can produce more peak power, but have way more downsides. More heat, needing an intercooler at high boost levels. A modern twin screw(or fancy new TVS) supercharger is a relatively light weight simple package. Turbo systems just bring headaches.

No. I'm OK with with turbos but not downsizing.
Upside the engine, supercharge, and twin turbos please

Remember that most manufactures only want one basic engine design that they can configure for different applications.

Downsizing means your going to shrink the bore and under stroked cylinders more than usual, but cylinder spacing and possibly deck height will stay the same. This means your downsized engine isn't smaller packaging or weight wise compared to a full size engine.

The other option is that the next major V8 redesign they shrink the displacement across the lineup further. That means no big V8s.

The best answer is MORE DISPLACEMENT.

>More heat
No. Turbo's are more efficient compressor, so they add less heat for any given boost level.
>needing an intercooler at high boost levels.
Twin screw and Roots blowers (TVS = Roots) need intercoolers for most applications over 7-8 psi, or about 1 bar. Turbo's can generally run without for a big longer, up to 1 bar in some applications. Turbos are such efficient compressors they can even get up to 2-3 bar with intercoolers in some OEM applications. Try that with a supercharger.

Superchargers are simple, and great for aftermarket low-boost power adders to an existing V8.
Turbo's are superior in power and efficiency. Their packaging difficulties are easily solved by OEMs.

>The best answer is MORE DISPLACEMENT.
Why not both?

What about centrifugal superchargers?

Yeah, the pricing is a good point.

Turbos won't deliver power in the same range that a simple supercharger will. Getting a turbo to match the power output of a supercharger in the lower powerband will require the system to be running more boost.

this

They're loud and faggy.

no, i want a turbocharged 2 liter inline six

Turbo's are turbine driven centrifugal compressors.
Centrifugals are belt driven centrifugal compressors.

They're similarly efficient, but rarely used by OEM's.

>Turbos won't deliver power in the same range that a simple supercharger will.
No. Drive an modern turbo shitbox (Fiesta, Panda, etc.), and there's no practical difference between a turbo and a supercharger, except the turbo's superior power output, and fuel economy during cruise.

>Getting a turbo to match the power output of a supercharger in the lower powerband will require the system to be running more boost.
Confirmed for knowing nothing about turbo's.

You use a smaller turbo to get X boost at low RPM - but then the turbine becomes an exhaust restriction, so you use either a VGT or another turbo to allow flow up top. It's still wastegate-controlled at X psi at every point, unless you're actively tuning it to get more psi of boost the higher you get in the RPM range. Your goal as a tuner, if you want maximum power, is to make X psi from idle to redline, without choking the exhaust.

>downsized by changing notation
what did user mean by this?

Why don't displaclets ever understand? The LS and Hemi engines are the same physical size or smaller than these "tiny" V8 engines.

Funny how mercedes cars sound good while bmw cars sound like a broken vacuum

Needs to be at least 5L or go home. What is the maximum size OHC engine that would fit in a muscle car? Ford just squeezed the 5.4L in but Mercedes had the 6.3L.

A well matched turbo will run at a much wider range than a well matched supercharger.

Biggest advantage of the turbo is it's infinitely variable crankshaft ratio, so it can be turning a lot harder earlier on, whilst having every bit of the top flow a belt driven centrifugal blower has.
The rest of your post is absolutely on point.

I felt my dick twitch at the thought of this.