[davidl]

Hi All

I've been browsing this forum for a few weeks now and appreciate all the valuable info which is posted. Just decided to register and thought I'd say Hello 8D and post some semi-relevant info I found this lunchtime:

I read somewhere that the MINI Cooper S will use an Eaton Supercharger (same as Merc Kompressors) the manufacturers site is:

http://www.eaton.com/supercharger/

Some decent info on superchargers there. Hope this is of interest to others - I was pleased to see that the supercharger has very little effect on fuel consumption (1 MPG!!) and that noise shouldn't be an issue.

Has anyone experience of driving a supercharged car? (possibly comparison with turbo).

Has anyone else in the forum decided to wait for a Cooper S - How can we wait another 8-10 months :'(

If I buy a Cooper now what trade-in value (towards a Cooper S) do you think it would be worth in a years time ?

[Paul]

Hi David, welcome to the forum.

I can't justify the expense of a new car at the moment, so I am determined to get enough cash together for a Cooper 'S' next year. Personally I found the Cooper to be excellent, but I REALLY like the idea of the 'S', for only a few thousand more.

Thanks for the useful link too.

[Tim]

I am one of the (apparently) 123 of us in the UK who have ordered a Cooper S.

All the hype and reviews indicate that Coopers should sell for more than list price on the second hand market during this year. If you bought one for delivery in September and sold it again in February, you might make a slight profit to put towards fuzzy dice for your Cooper S (if you are that way inclined).

[panto]

Welcome davidl
about supercharged vs turbo:
supercharged has a better response in low revs, I drove a VW Corrado, with supercharger and it was wonderful.

Turbo has a better response at hi revs, but at low revs it´s a little letargic.
If you ask me, I prefer supercharger.

[Twinsun007]

I agree, basically a supercharger, bring belt driven from the engine, the extra power is permanently on tap... unlike a turbo, which does need to spool up to the necessary pressure. The turbos tend to be more manic once you reach the required boost though!

The Merc CLK I was in was quite groovy, although, it has to be said, for a Merc, the engine was a little course! Not highly impressed... but it shifted!

The Renault 5 GT Turbo I drove was bonkers once you got past about 3500 revs... and then past 5000 you hit warp drive!!! Mr. Sulu... Oh... fuel consumption... keep that turbo on the boil... Watch the needle drop!!

It should be interesting to see how the MINI's engine does with the supercharger. I am sure that if BMW have anything to do with it, it will certainly not be course - and it will, as the figures are predicting... SHIFT!!!

We shall have to see when it is released, eh?

Grrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Want one now!!!!!!!!!!!

[Silverstone]

I have a little experience in this topic. A supercharger and turbocharger can both be sized to give identical top end power. Each system has its advantages and disadvantages:

Turbo:

Pro's - offer much greater mid range torque (at say 2500 to 4000rpm) than a typical supercharged engine - a well mapped turbo will give a completely flat torque curve from say 2500 - this gives fantastinc in-gear acceleration

Con's - low speed torque (from 1000 to 2500) can be quite poor. Makes clean pull-aways from rest quite difficult without bogging-down or getting wheel spin. The dreaded "turbo lag" - depends how well matched the turbo is to the engine - modern turbos are much better (note reports on recent Audi products). Since lag is the time difference between off-boost and on-boost torque, and turbo's produce more mid range boost, lag becomes more noticable. (This is why "low-blow" turbo's appear to have less lag).Turbos have bearings that have to run at 150,000rpm!! - after shut-down they need to be kept cool to prevent oil coking - most turbo's are water cooled for this reason - but care is still required.

Supercharger:

Pro's - Better throttle response. No hot shut-down worries.

Con's - less mid range torque than a turbo (all things being equal), noise - (you either love it or hate it) - more modern S/C's are quieter. Less efficient than a turbo, so needs more charge cooling to give equivalent performance.

To be frank - right now Superchargers are in fashion, Turbochargers are not - both systems are a more efficient way to more power than "more cubes"

[BruceK]

I owned a turbo MItsubishi for 10 years and Silverstone presents the turbo advantages and disadvantages perfectly.

Because the turbos share the engine oil and spin at 100,000 rpm or more, it is very necessary to use high quality oil and change it often. I used Mobil 1 and changed it and the filter every 3K miles like clockwork. I was told to expect the turbo to last only about 75K miles before replacement, but I sold the car with more than 120K miles having never had a turbo problem. Letting the engine idle (tickover) for 30 seconds to a minute before shuting it down (to let the turbo spool down) was a real pain, though. One of the best parts of owning the car was taking it into the mountains where high altitude would have no affect at all on engine performance due to the turbo.

I am really looking forward to the supercharger in the Cooper S.

[sunnyvalemazda]

I'd much rather have a turbocharger than a supercharger. While the low end power makes for a great driver, its much easer to extract HP out of a turbocharged engine. Plus, nothing beats the sound the external wastegate makes when it opens up. =] When the 'S' finally hits the shores, ill start working on a turbo kit.

-seth