What's the deal with Kompressors?

Page may contain affiliate links. Please see terms for details.

Nasco12

Active Member
Joined
Jul 18, 2009
Messages
371
Location
Twickenham
Car
W202 C240 1999 Green; Previous: W202 C200
Yes, yes, I know they're Mercedes's name for super-chargers. And I know Mercedes started introducing them about 10 years ago. And I know it's made a mess of the nomenclature with a 230K having a 1.8. But why were they introduced? What does a Kompressor do that a bigger engine does not? And why a super-charger rather than a turbo? OK, so there's no super-lag. But that being the case why did everyone else go for turbos? And if super-chargers were such a good idea why hadn't someone thought of them before? OK, so you had them in the Blower Bentleys in the 1920s but not (as far as I am aware) until recently in saloons.

I suspect the answer is that it was the moment that advances in technology meant that super-chargers could not only produce all the power but do so without simultaneous knock-on effects to reliability and cost. But is that the case - was there something else going on? And if it is the case what were the key advances?
 
What does a Kompressor do that a bigger engine does not? And why a super-charger rather than a turbo?

In principle a clutched supercharger means you can use a small engine as a small engine with minmal overheads. Then when the driver demands more power the supercharger can be activated. It's controllable and predictable.

A turbo is a bit less controllable (funny how after all these years people still talk about lag being eliminated - if that was truly the case it wouldn't be worth mentioning - bit like scuttle shake). And they run rather hotter which means a different set of compromises in the engine bay and with the exhaust system.

And MB probably just wanted to be a bit different.
 
Superchargers solved the lag turbo got but it more expensive.

Merc had to dump it in favour of CGI because of emission problem.

What the point of manufacturing its if there are no one going to buy it?

So is the dead of V8 due to emission problem.
 
And they run rather hotter

As can be seen by the lack of older cars that had turbo's that are still around today (Think Renault 5 Turbo, etc - seen so many of these parked up with smoke coming out of the engine bay and a sad looking owner stood next to it :doh:)
 
I believe that the next generation of MB engines are going to be Turbo Charged.
 
I believe that the next generation of MB engines are going to be Turbo Charged.

It seems Mercedes are indeed about to embrace the turbocharged petrol engine at last after many years saying they were not reliable enough. My guess is that the turbocharged engine running on exhaust gas waste heat yields a more thermally efficient power-plant with lower emissions and fuel consumption than the supercharged engine. Hence their adoption now. Lots of the teething problems of turbocharging have been sorted out with experience gained with the diesel engines and the further advantages gained with direct petrol injection seemed to have swayed the argument in their favour. Mercedes Joins Engine Downsizing, Electric Trends - Auto Observer
 
Guarantee, no emissions laws = no turbos.
 
Nothing new with Supercharging.

Just one well two of many examples:

supercharged-polo_g40_and_corra0001.jpg
 
Jaguar were at it a while ago with their 4.2 V8. Likewise Aston and the original DB7s. Vauxhall/Holden use it on their Monaro thingy and I think VW are back at it with their 1.4 which I think also has a turbo.
 
Nothing new with Supercharging.

Just one well two of many examples:

I would have chosen a different aircraft - one with a water cooled and supercharged V12 as opposed to a supercharged air cooled radial.

Maybe VW just don't like Rolls Royce after they lost the rights to the name.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top Bottom