I dont know why GM wont offer one They could make the cobalt turbo like the sRT4, that would steal soooo many sales from imports and what not. just for the simple fact that the turbos are usually limitless. you have the turbo pipin you can just turn the boost up and what not, for a supercharger yougotta get the pulley and then you max it out and what not. I think gm should make their lil FI 4 cyls with turbos. I dunno im just ranting, id rather have my v8 im just sayin that would be a smart business move.

 

i'm a big fan of turbos myself, but I guess GM prefers to to do things th NA way...and when forced induction does come, it'll probably be SC because of simpler design

 

They do have turbos, read Saab and the H3t, and maybe a couple others; not sure tho. Besides that, i agree with having turbos rather than supercharges. Other than that, i like that they keep most of their cars NA

 

i guess no one has heard of the upcoming Equinox Extreme...and yes, turbo charged AWD fun modern day SyTy possibly?

 

GM has a tough time dealing with customer perception.

While a supercharged 4 cylinder would be less expensive, the younger (dare I say ricer) buyers prefer Turbos.

It's the same kind of thinking that puts a pushrod V6 in mainstream sedans. Sure it makes "comparable" power but buyers want or expect overhead cams.

In both cases...they should say "okay, we're taking a different path, but that means we have to be more than just comparable in performance and/or economy - we have to be BETTER, or we won't win the perception battle." With the exception of certain V8 engines, this doesn't ring true often.

 

Naah. They'd just f*** it up and give it 200hp for more money than a 265hp SRT-4(that's what they're making stock!!)

Better to just let it remain an unmolested dream in our own minds.

 

although, it would be better for performance than a supercharger as well, I agree GM should release a couple of turbo models, simply because its a buzzword today.

Mention Turbo today, and you have people attention. It would steal sales even if it didnt give gains over the SC. I dont understand why they dont utilize that.

The only possibly thing I can think, is the fact that nearly all of GMs past turbo cars/trucks are absolute performance icons. Mention the 89 TTA, Gn, Syclone/Typhoon and people drool. Maybe they dont want to cheapen that image

 

Riiiiight... GM not wanting to cheapen an image, that's pretty funny!

I mean, look at how hard they're trying to keep the SS badge as legendary as it once (supposedly) was! That Aveo SS is going to be MaD TitE yo!

 

Although modern superchargers have the potential for as much power as turbos...turbos are ideed coming to GM cars. It's not so much that GM wants to be trendy....it's because GM has inherted a whole bunch of SAAB engineers, who really know turbos. Turbo Ecotecs have a future at Chevy.

By the time we get our "Chevy Coupe",turbo engines will be in Chevys. Cobalt SS for sure, Nomad if that car materialises, and probably some version of the Colorado.

 

I really doubt the average consumer really cares if an engine is turbocharged or supercharged.

They would look at both the cars as a whole when comparing them. Chevy comes out with a S/C Cobalt SS and Dodge has the SRT-4----the Cobalt should be way better car in terms of quality and design ect. Plus you can get a 2 door coupe--a serious mistake by Dodge not to offer one.

Only a few nut cases would seriously care and choose a turbo over a supercharger, all things considered.

 

Why would anyone want a turbo over a supercharger?

Superchargers don't have the lag that most turbo's do...

 

A turbocharged Cobalt might actually have me considering a small car down the road. The SRT-4 isn't bad, but the Cobalt looks much better inside and out, IMO.

 

Forget about a turbo I-4...let's see GM take a 21st century crack at a turbocharged, intercooled V6.
It's phenomenal how well a turbo V6 car run.
I was running as fast as pullied/chipped or otherwise modded '03/'04 Cobras at Atco on Sunday in a very lightly modded, 17 year-old, 3686lb. brick. Imagine what could be done in a lighter platform with 17 years of technology.
S.

 

With modern tech, lag isn't a big an issue as it once was. Ex: EVO's now have twin-scroll turbo's which help down low. Some of the aftermarket turbo's have ball-bearing so they spool quicker as well. Overall, turbo's are becoming a lot more efficient.

Plus, full boost or close to full boost can be had at a relatively low rpm when the turbo is properly matched to the engine.

Overall, turbochargers have their appeal as well as pluses over a blower setup. Given the choice between the two, i wouldn't hesitate to go turbo.

 

That's my position.

By all accounts, it seems that turbo lag isn't as big an issue as it used to be & I know that the younger crowd is into turbos.

If they are willing to pay for them (turbos are typically more expensive than simply strapping on a supercharger), then I say go for it.