Every year, automakers are trying to improve not only the design, but also the technical characteristics of cars. Improvements relate to all aspects, including the engine. Now for several decades, various types of superchargers have been installed on many cars. They are designed to improve the power and torque of the motor. There are two types of blowers. This is a compressor and a turbine. What's better? The difference, pros and cons of both units - in our article.
Destination
As we said earlier, these devices are designed to improve engine performance. Their function is to force air into the intake manifold of the internal combustion engine. Oxygen enters the chamber in large volumes, thereby increasing the return and efficiency. But to figure out which is better -compressor or turbine, consider each mechanism separately.
Compressor Features
This is a mechanical supercharger that comes in several types:
- Screw.
- Rotary.
- Centrifugal.
Compressors began to be installed on cars long before the appearance of turbines - approximately in the 50-60s of the last century. Now, such units are practically not used. The latest manufacturers to install compressors are Mercedes and Range Rover.
Pros and cons
Which is better - compressor or turbine? Cars with a compressor have several advantages:
- Reliability. The device of such a mechanism is very simple, and therefore breakdowns are practically excluded.
- No dips during hard acceleration.
- No need for additional cooling and lubrication.
- Low chance of overheating.
- Large engine resource.
Answering the question of what is better - a compressor or a turbine, it is worth considering the disadvantages of the first mechanism. The main disadvantage is the low performance of the compressor. So, the unit can increase power by no more than 10 percent. Today, this is a very small indicator, for the sake of which manufacturers do not dare to complicate the design of a car and make it more expensive.
And all because the mechanism is driven by the crankshaft pulley. That is, the efficiency of the compressor directly depends on the rotation of the pulley. And since the turnovereach engine are limited, the efficiency of the mechanical supercharger will not be too high.
Turbocharger features
Which is better - compressor or turbine? Now consider the features of the turbocharger. Such a mechanism does not depend on the crankshaft. It works on a different principle.
The impeller rotates due to the stroke of the exhaust gases. The turbine has a cold part and a hot part. Gases move through the latter, forcing the impeller of the cold part to work. The number of revolutions per minute is many times greater than that of a mechanical supercharger. Hence the performance. As practice shows, due to supercharging, you can increase power up to 40 percent, with virtually no loss of resource.
Thus, the main advantage of the turbine is its performance. In addition, there is the possibility of chip tuning, which allows you to increase the engine power by another couple of percent. But the shortcomings are obvious.
As the engine power increases, so does the load on the crank mechanism. It follows that the details must be reliable. But this is not always the case, especially on chipped internal combustion engines. Often, the crankshaft does not withstand such loads, and therefore the motor resource is reduced significantly.
The norm for turbocharged engines considers a resource of 150 thousand kilometers (if we take into account modern TSI). Also, the turbine often likes to eat up oil. Its consumption is from one liter per 10 thousand kilometers (and this is on a serviceable engine). In addition, the oil must be of high quality. Otherwise, the engine resourcewill be even less.
Engines with a compressor don't have this problem. They do not require oil and do not load the engine as much. Accordingly, any compressor motor will be more resourceful than a turbocharged one.
But, as statistics show, more and more manufacturers prefer to use the second type of boost. This is especially true for diesel units. They have a more durable structure, and the operating speed is not as high as that of gasoline ones. However, after 250 thousand kilometers, problems happen with them.
Which is better to choose?
So, let's summarize. Which is better - a mechanical compressor or a turbine? There is no single answer to this question. Everyone chooses based on requirements and preferences. If the resource is a priority, you should limit yourself to the compressor and be content with 10 percent of the additional power. But if you want maximum return, here the choice will be obvious - only a turbine. However, you should always remember that such an engine can suddenly "end" - it will require repair of the turbine or KShM parts.
Consider the choice in terms of tuning. What is better on a VAZ - a compressor or a turbine? Many choose the second option, since the resource of VAZ engines is already insignificant.
