N/A vs Supercharged for Street Use

[Falcouver]

Strictly talking "non-track" - spirited driving on the streets & twisties, We often hear people preferring N/A (naturally aspirated) engines over FI (forced induction) ie supercharged or turbo applications.

N/A usually gets associated with precision, fun and "driver's cars". In C7's world the comparison goes by Stingray/GS (N/A) vs Z06 (SC) similar to Porsche's 911 GT3 (N/A) vs 911 Turbo.

Common reasons are better "feel", linear power, reliability with N/A vs sudden surge of brute power with driveability issues. But these comments often go without being explained and understood.

It's obviously not about power as FI will almost always have more HP/Torque. So what do you mean by better feel? Is it being an old school purist? The nostalgia of driving an "all-motor" machine? What does this all mean for a N/A driver?

Can people swearing by N/A engines elaborate on why do you prefer it over FI ?

 

[Murray20c8]

For one thing, I wouldn't lump turbo & superchargers together. They both have benefits and detractions. Turbos require rpm's and superchargers are better at low rpm's. So a SC might be better as a daily driver on short streets where turbos would perform better on highways. As for NA the performance band is likely flatter and therefore better for daily life.
I'm certainly no expert, but this, of course, is when all else is equal. Turbos usually have different engine requirements and with all things it all depends on where you start. What engine etc.
Are you thinking of upgrading your C7? That makes your options totally unique for your application.

 

[Falcouver]

I agree SC and Turbos wouldnt lump together, that's why I opened up with FI (Forced Induction) in my comments. To your question - I dont particularly see supercharged options as "upgrades" thus created this thread. Z06 may do some things better than Stingray/GS and can be other way around for some.

What I wanted to have is a discussion on N/A vs Supercharged preference. We see time to time people holding their ground on not supercharging their cars stating they want to stay N/A.

I gave the Porsche 911 GT3 vs Turbo as an example as I find Grand Sport vs Z06 a similar comparison with lower power handling focused machine vs brute force. Also gave Miata as an example as that's another car focused on balance and driving enjoyment (Stingray/GS) vs an engine dominating the whole experience. (Z06)

I was curious to see from the Corvette community which side people lean in and why. And especially for people who prefer N/A, why exactly? Why do we enjoy linear power delivery vs instant torque on the streets? What other advantages do people find with N/A over Supercharged - why the preference?

 

[1st Vette]

I agree SC and Turbos wouldnt lump together, that's why I opened up with FI (Forced Induction) in my comments. To your question - I dont particularly see supercharged options as "upgrades" thus created this thread. Z06 may do some things better than Stingray/GS and can be other way around for some.

What I wanted to have is a discussion on N/A vs Supercharged preference. We see time to time people holding their ground on not supercharging their cars stating they want to stay N/A.

I gave the Porsche 911 GT3 vs Turbo as an example as I find Grand Sport vs Z06 a similar comparison with lower power handling focused machine vs brute force. Also gave Miata as an example as that's another car focused on balance and driving enjoyment (Stingray/GS) vs an engine dominating the whole experience. (Z06)

I was curious to see from the Corvette community which side people lean in and why. And especially for people who prefer N/A, why exactly? Why do we enjoy linear power delivery vs instant torque on the streets? What other advantages do people find with N/A over Supercharged - why the preference?

Good points. Some say that it’s a better experience to drive a slower vehicle fast than a fast vehicle slower. I think there’s something to be said for that. All depends on what you’re after.

 

[cdnz]

Good points. Some say that it’s a better experience to drive a slower vehicle fast than a fast vehicle slower. I think there’s something to be said for that. All depends on what you’re after.

I beg to differ. I would much rather drive a C8 at 100 kph vs a Mazda 2 at 140 kph.

 

[1st Vette]

I beg to differ. I would much rather drive a C8 at 100 kph vs a Mazda 2 at 140 kph.

Yup . Some say…..both can be fun. Ideally you would have one of each. I have never driven one but every review I’ve read about the Mazda Miata the opinion is just about always that it’s a heck of a lot of fun and challenge flat out on a winding road. Even has its own racing series.