Originally Posted by GoingTooFast
Man, this says it all... if you don't understand how the lack of turbo lag - which is absent with a supercharger - majorly influences the handling of a car you don't know what your talking about.
You are a marketer's soggy wet dream. You had a Miata or two. Remind me, was Flying Miata doing superchargers or turbos? Did MazdaSpeed build a turbo or a supercharger? Sure, that crappy little Moss supercharger was cheap, but anyone that modified a Miata either coveted a turbo or an American V8, not the castaway blower from an SLK.
Toyota supercharged the MR2, then oops, dropped that and used a turbo later. Jaguar supercharged the XK and XJ, and again, dropped that and went to a turbo. AMG, same story.
Try this, name a few famous cars (you can even have the 30's, hint, Bentley Blower) that have superchargers. I'll take turbos, we'll see whose list is more significant.
As I said earlier, I've driven a handful of supercharged cars (including a Moss Miata) and all of them with small engines were less than fun to drive. The big V8's with blowers were fun, but likely would have been without a blower too. I've driven a lot more than a handful of turbos and nearly all are fun. Did some have lag that you could use an egg timer to record? Oh hell yeah, but were any of those modern, nope.
If Toyota had said they were using a non syncronized four speed to save weight, you'd be busy trying to tell us how double de-clutching was beautiful and how pure it was. Superchargers are dumb and out dated, if they weren't wouldn't it just make sense that someone, anyone, in the auto illetaratii was using one on an exotic?